UN/WHO Archives - Page 36 of 43

May 10, 2020December 19, 2021

Catherine McKenna: Co-Founder Of NGO, Canadian Lawyers Abroad

1. Important Links

(1) http://catherinemckenna.liberal.ca/biography/
(2) http://catherinemckenna.ca/site/2013/09/exciting-times-canadian-lawyers-abroad/
(3) http://archive.is/DYoQg
(4) https://canadianlawyersabroad.wordpress.com/
(5) http://archive.is/fqUPW
(6) https://canadianlawyersabroad.wordpress.com/author/canadianlawyersabroad/
(7) http://archive.is/UOSKe
(8) https://leveljustice.org/news
(9) http://archive.is/zWgkW
(10) https://canadianlawyersabroad.wordpress.com/2015/11/04/canadian-lawyers-abroad-goes-next-level-with-new-name-and-new-look/
(11) http://archive.is/OlXub

2. Context For This Article

When a person steps into public office, such as being a Member of Parliament, it is expected that they will have no other associations or obligations that will interfere with this role. They are expected to have no conflict of interest. For Ottawa MP Catherine McKenna, however, that is not the case.

She co-founded an NGO called Canadian Lawyers Abroad in 2006, which was aimed at getting Canadian law graduates to take on international matters. McKenna remained a director of this organization until the day of the 2015 election.

What does this group (whatever its name is) actually do? Looking at its profile, under the name Level Justice, it seems to focus on social justice and indoctrination for aspiring lawyers. Think of it as a sort of brainwashing movement, promoting a more globalist, or internationalist approach.

It also operates a student internship, where law students and graduates take on work abroad. This amounts to a summer or so or volunteer work abroad, working for NGOs. An interesting situation: even while running for office, Catherine McKenna was a director at an NGO, which tried to get law students to go work for other NGOs abroad. The annual reports do list where people have gone, but more information would have been nice on the work they do.

But looking at the reports issued, it seemed that this global internship was not the biggest focus. More efforts were spent on local initiatives.

3. “Candidate” McKenna Stayed On CLA Board

Today was a big week in the history of Canadian Lawyers Abroad. On Monday, Brittany Twiss came on board as our new Executive Director. The torch had officially passed from Yasmin Shaker and me, the CLA co-founders, to the next generation!

It is bittersweet to be leaving as ED of CLA (although I will still be on the board). I realize how lucky I have been to work with so many passionate and committed lawyers and law students who live up to CLA’s motto of using law to improve lives. We are lucky to count among our boosters (and my mentors) amazing leaders in the legal community including Allan Rock and Nathalie Des Rosiers (who very kindly gave us our first office at the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law), Bill Graham, Antonio Lamer, Ed Waitzer, Bob Rae, Greg Kane and Armand de Mestral. We also have thousands of law students who have come through our Student Chapter and Student Internship Programs who are now using their law degrees to build the rule of law and promote human rights in Canada and around the world.

McKenna remained on the Board of Canadian Lawyers Abroad, even though she was campaigning to become a Member of Parliament in the 2015 election. That page is from 2013, but it has to be asked: did McKenna remain on the Board after getting elected? Is she on the Board today? Is she using her position as an MP to push CLA’s agenda?

4. McKenna’s Posts On CLA Blog

About Catherine
I am a Co-Founder, former Executive Director and current Board Member of Canadian Lawyers Abroad. I am Executive Director of the Banff Forum and a lecturer at the Munk School of Global Affairs in Toronto.

Here, Catherine McKenna describes in broad strokes what her organization is, and what it’s goals are. Again, she remained a board member while running for public office, which is a huge conflict of interest.

How? In two ways. First, we run a Student Program that brings together law students from across the country who are passionate about using their law degree to make positive changes around the world. CLA provides a forum for discussion and debate and, through our Summer Internship Program, we offer students the possibility of gaining practical experience with our amazing partners in developing countries and Canada’s north.

Second, we develop innovative projects with our partners that will lead to positive, long-term changes in their communities. For example, we’re helping the KNUST Faculty of Law in Ghana set up a university legal clinic. University legal clinics have been a very successful model in Canada and Canadian lawyers and law students are well-placed to provide assistance. This project will give KNUST law students practical, real-life training and provide marginalized groups, in particular women and youth, access to desperately needed legal information and services. In the long-term, by promoting the rule of law and protecting human rights, this project will help reduce poverty and promote economic development in Ghana. We plan on replicating this pilot project with other partners around the world.

This all sounds great, but when you are an elected MP in Ottawa (or any riding) your allegiance is to the people of that riding. Remaining part of this organization makes McKenna look compromised.

In another article, McKenna outlines how law school is becoming a losing game, as there are more graduates than positions in articling available. She actually has a valid point, and the situation in the United States is much worse. Could this be a way of swaying more lawyers to her cause?

5. CDN Lawyers Abroad A.K.A. Level Justice

In September 2015, Canadian Lawyers Abroad underwent a name change and overhauled its website. However, its indoctrination agenda seems to be pretty much the same, so the changes are more cosmetic.

Level.Justice.Change.Of.Name
Level.Justice.2.Certificate.Of.Continuance.
Level.Justice.3.Bylaws.For.Organization
Level.Justice.4.Director.List.In.2014
Level.Justice.5.Change.Of.Corporate.Address
Level.Justice.6.Director.Change.October.2015.McKenna.Out

Looking at the corporate documents, it seems that Canadian Lawyers Abroad was renamed to LEVEL. CHANGING LIVES THROUGH LAW. It also looks like Catherine McKenna remained a Director at the organization until October 19, 2015. This was the day of the election which put her into office. Since there is no time listed, she may have only resigned after having won her seat.

6. CLA/Level Is Registered Charity

This is a bit confusing. McKenna stepped down as Executive Director in 2013. So, was she not considered a Director (according to the CRA) until this happened?

For Period Ending December 31, 2015
Receipted donations $82,191.00 (48.34%)
Non-receipted donations $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts from other registered charities $81,039.00 (47.66%)
Government funding $0.00 (0.00%)
All other revenue $6,788.00 (3.99%)
Total revenue: $170,018.00

Charitable programs $97,086.00 (79.87%)
Management and administration $0.00 (0.00%)
Fundraising $8,868.00 (7.30%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $15,597.00 (12.83%)
Total expenses: $121,551.00

Professional and consulting fees
$61,966.00

Note: There is no compensation listed for employees

For Period Ending December 31, 2016
Receipted donations $10,600.00 (7.54%)
Non-receipted donations $78,864.00 (56.07%)
Gifts from other registered charities $43,000.00 (30.57%)
Government funding $0.00 (0.00%)
All other revenue $8,200.00 (5.83%)
Total revenue: $140,664.00

Charitable programs $116,887.00 (90.23%)
Management and administration $12,652.00 (9.77%)
Fundraising $0.00 (0.00%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $129,539.00

Compensation
Total compensation for all positions
$72,746.00

Full-time employees (1)
Part-time employees (4)

Professional and consulting fees
$8,633.00

Compensated full-time positions:
$40,000 to $79,999 (1)

For Period Ending August 31, 2017
Receipted donations $0.00 (0.00%)
Non-receipted donations $110,300.00 (85.31%)
Gifts from other registered charities $18,992.00 (14.69%)
Government funding $0.00 (0.00%)
All other revenue $0.00 (0.00%)
Total revenue: $129,292.00

Expenses are listed as $163,006

Compensation
Total compensation for all positions
$96,529.00

Full-time employees (3)

Professional and consulting fees
$5,861.00

Compensated full-time positions:
$1 to $39,999 (2)
$40,000 to $79,999 (1)

For Period Ending August 31, 2018
Receipted donations $6,790.00 (1.71%)
Non-receipted donations $260,938.00 (65.58%)
Gifts from other registered charities $130,131.00 (32.71%)
Government funding $0.00 (0.00%)
All other revenue $28.00 (0.01%)
Total revenue: $397,887.00

Charitable programs $288,133.00 (91.80%)
Management and administration $25,747.00 (8.20%)
Fundraising $0.00 (0.00%)
Political activities $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $313,880.00

Compensation
Total compensation for all positions
$220,568.00

Full-time employees (3)

Professional and consulting fees
$12,006.00

Compensated full-time positions:
$40,000 to $79,999 (1)
$80,000 to $119,999 (2)

For Period Ending August 31, 2019
Receipted donations $10,000.00 (2.96%)
Non-receipted donations $156,492.00 (46.30%)
Gifts from other registered charities $171,448.00 (50.73%)
Government funding $0.00 (0.00%)
All other revenue $25.00 (0.01%)
Total revenue: $337,965.00

Charitable programs $220,726.00 (89.76%)
Management and administration $25,171.00 (10.24%)
Fundraising $0.00 (0.00%)
Gifts to other registered charities and qualified donees $0.00 (0.00%)
Other $0.00 (0.00%)
Total expenses: $245,897.00

Compensation
Total compensation for all positions
$168,747.00

Full-time employees (3)

Professional and consulting fees
$13,524.00

Compensated full-time positions:
$40,000 to $79,999 (3)

7. Little Info On Elections Canada Site

A quick search into the financing section of Elections Canada shows very little. In fact, as of the time of writing this, there are 21 donations total with McKenna’s name on them. Most are for a few hundred dollars. So McKenna hasn’t been getting large donations from various groups.

8. Global Internship Program

In summer 2016, Level placed 20 student interns with NGOs in Canada, the US, Ghana, Namibia, Kenya, Thailand, India and Bangladesh, where they gained practical human rights research and advocacy experience. While Level has made the difficult decision this year to shift its focus to local and remote internship opportunities, we are proud to have facilitated international internships for over 220 students since 2005. I would like to take this opportunity to thank our amazing partners for their support of our student initiatives, and their commitment to making justice a reality for some of the world’s most vulnerable populations.

Focused on an annual theme, Level’s Chapters organize community events, host conferences and panel discussions, and contribute research papers to an annual human rights journal. In 2016-17, our Chapters advanced awareness of women’s human rights both in Canada and abroad, and encouraged their peers to think critically about how they can use their budding legal skills to make a positive impact in their communities.

Through our Global Internship Program, 20 passionate and talented JD/LLB students spent the summer working for NGOs in Canada or overseas supporting grassroots efforts to increase access to justice and combat poverty, inequality and exploitation. Since 2005, over 220 students have advanced the mission of 45 organizations in 15 countries, while at the same time developing practical skills to advance their careers.

The quotes are from the annual 2016 report.
LJ.2014.annual.report
LJ.2015.annual.report
LJ.2016.annual.report
LJ.2018.annual.report

2014 through 2018 are available currently on the website.
On a serious note: one has to wonder how effective these students and new graduates would actually be. Not only would they have little to no experience in Canada, how could they contribute in countries where the culture and language are very different? How would they be able to operate in areas that might be highly suspicious of Westerners?

9. What This Group Does

From the looks of things, Canadian Lawyers Abroad, now called “Level Changing Lives Through The law”, or as “Level Justice”, runs a bunch of advocacy programs in Canada. The focus is on a social justice approach on crime, law, and access to representation.

The group has a “global internship program” which encourages law students and/or law school graduates to go abroad working for NGOs of other organizations. While the places are listed, it would be nice to know more about what these aspiring lawyers are in fact doing.

However, it appears that the bulk of the work has to do with domestic initiatives within Canada. That may explain the name change, as “Canadian Lawyers Abroad” left the impression that it was the bulk of their work.

Within Canada, it does seem to be focused on pitching the notion that poverty, racism and intolerance is what keeps people from getting access to justice. On the surface, this group seems to be noble and benevolent, though it views everything through the social justice lens.

April 30, 2020December 18, 2021

CV #13(B): More On Who Theresa Tam Really Is

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. The Gates Foundation finances: the World Health Organization, the Center for Disease Control, GAVI, ID2020, John Hopkins University, Imperial College London, the Pirbright Institute, the British Broadcasting Corporation, 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.

2. Important Links

3. Constructing A Timeline

Unfortunately, there is very little information available on her. No date of birth, or place of birth beyond “growing up in Hong Kong”. Even at the schools she claims to have completed, there is no searchable information. One would think they would happy to boast about the accomplishments of their alumnus.

The following credential dates are from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, but it doesn’t look like Tam has actually practiced medicine at all. There are publications with her name on it, but the rest of her past is a mystery.

1965 – Tam is born in HK (source: Wikipedia)
1989 – U of Nottingham medical degree (CPSO profile)
1996 – U of Alberta pediatric residency completed (CPSO profile)
1997 – UBC fellowship in infectious diseases (CPSO profile)
1999 – Independent Practice Certificate issues (CPSO profile)

In her CPSO profile, Tam claims not to have used any other names, which would contradict speculation that she once went by the name “Tan Yongshi”.

4. Tam’s CPSO Profile Page

The information here can be found at the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, (CPSO), the board which licenses doctors. The profile lists “EDUCATION” as coming from the University of Nottingham (in the UK) in 1989. Yes, it was followed up with the College of Physicians and Surgeons that it referred to a medical degree. However, no undergraduate degree is listed.

It also lists finishing a University of Alberta pediatric residency in June 1996. Severn years? That seems to be a particularly long time to finish, so what was she doing in the meantime?

The fellowship in the University of British Columbia in pediatric infectious diseases was finished in September 1997.

What’s interesting though is that in researching these schools: Nottingham, UAlberta and UBC, there is no mention of Theresa Tam at all. Once would think that a graduate who is not “Canada’s top doctor” would warrant special attention and adoration. But there isn’t any mention of her at all.

It also states:

First certificate of registration issued: Independent Practice Certificate

However, Tam was getting into government around that time. It doesn’t look like she ever practiced — ANYWHERE. Yet she has become “Canada’s Top Doctor”. She graduated medical school in 1989 and never got a license to practice until a decade later?

5. No Practice Information In Profile

Dr. Theresa Tam was named Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer on June 26, 2017. She is a physician with expertise in immunization, infectious disease, emergency preparedness and global health security.

Dr. Tam obtained her medical degree from the University of Nottingham in the U.K. She completed her paediatric residency at the University of Alberta and her fellowship in paediatric infectious diseases at the University of British Columbia. She is a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada and has over 55 peer-reviewed journal publications in public health. She is also a graduate of the Canadian Field Epidemiology Program.

Dr. Tam has held several senior leadership positions at the Public Health Agency of Canada, including as the Deputy Chief Public Health Officer and the Assistant Deputy Minister for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control. During her 20 years in public health, she provided technical expertise and leadership on new initiatives to improve communicable disease surveillance, enhance immunization programs, strengthen health emergency management and laboratory biosafety and biosecurity. She has played a leadership role in Canada’s response to public health emergencies including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), pandemic influenza H1N1 and Ebola.

Dr. Tam has served as an international expert on a number of World Health Organization committees and has participated in multiple international missions related to SARS, pandemic influenza and polio eradication.

Again, it doesn’t appear from this that Theresa Tam has ever actually practiced medicine. Her first authorization for independent practice was issued in 1999, and she has been in various Government roles for 20 years now.

To get even stranger, it appears that the profile provided here is a cut and paste equivalent of the World Health Organization profile for Tam.

6. Identical Photo/Profile With WHO

Dr. Tam has held several senior leadership positions at the Public Health Agency of Canada, including as the Deputy Chief Public Health Officer and the Assistant Deputy Minister for Infectious Disease Prevention and Control. During her 20 years in public health, she provided technical expertise and leadership on new initiatives to improve communicable disease surveillance, enhance immunization programs, strengthen health emergency management and laboratory biosafety and biosecurity. She has played a leadership role in Canada’s response to public health emergencies including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), pandemic influenza H1N1 and Ebola.

Dr. Tam has served as an international expert on a number of World Health Organization committees and has participated in multiple international missions related to SARS, pandemic influenza and polio eradication.

Sound familiar? It is a cut-and-paste equivalent of what is listed in the Canadian profile. Lazy writing, or is she just serving 2 masters?

7. WHO Committee Tam Serves On

PURPOSE 1. The purpose of the Independent Oversight and Advisory Committee (the Committee”), for the WHO Health Emergencies Programme (“the Programme”), established by the Director-General, is to provide oversight and monitoring of the development and performance of the Programme, guide the Programme’s activities, and report its findings through the Executive Board to the Health Assembly. The Committee will advise the Director-General on issues within its mandate. Reports of the Committee will be shared with the Secretary General of the United Nations and with the United Nations’ InterAgency Standing Committee.

WHO.independent.advisory.committee

Tam is in the obvious conflict of interest in both being:
(a) Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer;
(b) serving on this WHO Committee

So does she serve Canada, or the World Health Organization?

Dr Geeta Rao Gupta has over 20 years of experience in international development programming, advocacy and research with UNICEF.

Prior to her appointment as Deputy Executive Director (Programmes), Dr Rao Gupta served as a senior fellow at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation from 2010 to 2011. She acted as the senior adviser to the Global Development Programme on the strategic direction and management of a cross-cutting range of issues and projects.

One of the WHO Committee Members that Tam works with was previously a senior fellow at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Would be interesting to ask her take on mass vaccinations. Now, let’s see who else is on the Committee.

Prior to his appointment, Mr Konyndyk worked for Mercy Corps, a global relief and development organization, as its Director of Policy and Advocacy. From 2008 to 2013, he led high-level strategic outreach to governments, donors, the UN, and other partners with a focus on resilience and humanitarian responses to Sudan, Syria, and the Horn of Africa. From 2003 to 2008, he served as the American Refugee Committee’s Country Director in South Sudan, Uganda, and Guinea, designing and leading humanitarian responses in conflict and post-conflict settings. Mr Konyndyk earlier served as a Refugee Officer with the US Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration where he managed the Bureau’s portfolio for the Balkans. In addition, he led non-governmental organization relief programmes in Kosovo and Albania following the Kosovo refugee crisis.

For those not familiar, Mercy Corps is an NGO who aims to flood the West with migrants and refugees from Africa and the Middle East.

8. Pharma Funding World Health Org., 2017

WHO.Contributions2017Listings

Note: this is by no means an exhaustive list. However, it should provide some insight as to who is funding the World Health Organization, and give a hint as to what the agenda is.

From Schedule 2:

Institution	Amount of Money
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation	$324,654,317
World Bank	$145,568,331
GAVI Alliance	$133,365,051
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)	$18,251,940
Vital Strategies	$10,647,550
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)	$7,365,666
Hoffmann-La Roche and Co	$6,628,090
Gilead Sciences Inc.	$3,124,450
Merck Sharp and Dohme Chibret	$1,652,226
Bayer AG	$1,158,060
Rockefeller Foundation	$748,945
Merck	$510,000
Novartis	$500,000
International Organization for Migration (IOM)	$332,290
Kitasato Daiichi Sankyo Vaccine Co., Ltd(PVS)	$220,155
Path Vaccine Solutions(PVS)	$294,582
Fluart Innovative Vaccines Ltd.	$73,645
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of PH	$88,069
Path Vaccine Solutions (PVS)	$73,385
Open Society Institute Budapest Foundation	$55,000
Int’l Fed. of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Ass’n	$50,000

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the biggest individual donor (excluding nations). Geeta Rao Gupta is a former Senior Fellow at the Gates Foundation. She is also one of the people on the World Health Org. Committee that Theresa Tam works on.

While Tam is “supposed” to be representing the interests of Canadians, her other employer, the World Health Organization, receives large funding from:

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
World Bank
GAVI Alliance (Gates funded
The Pharma lobby

Side note: The UN Development Program is helping to fund the International Vaccine Institution (which partners with VIDO-InterVac at the University of Saskatchewan). Gates and GAVI help fund that too.

Can it be any surprise that Tam sees mass vaccination as the solution to this so-called “pandemic” in Canada? After all, it’s what her employers want to see happen. And this is hardly the only time this has happened. Certainly individual countries do make significant contributions to the WHO, but the pharma lobbying can’t be ignored.

9. Pharma Funding World Health Org., 2018

Also worth a look is the 2018 statement of contributions.
WHO.Contributions.Statement.2018

From Schedule 2:

Institution	Amount of Money
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation	$228,970,196
GAVI Alliance	$158,545,964
World Bank	$20,556,661
UNITAID	$19,688,301
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB, Malaria	$14,769,596
Hoffmann-La Roche and Co., Ltd	$6,624,600
United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)	$6,504,848
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)	$5,482,827
Medimmune	$2,086,169
KNCV Tuberculosis Foundation	$2,045,388
Merck & Co., Inc	$1,184,398
Novartis	$500,000
Kitasato Daiichi Sankyo Vaccine Co., Ltd	$294,427
Islamic Development Bank	$200,000
World Hepatitis Alliance	$200,000
SK Bioscience	$122,678
Fluart Innovative Vaccines Ltd.	$73,607
Int’l Fed. of Anthroposophic Medical Ass’s	$50,000
Takeda Pharmaceuticals International GmbH	$19,702

Again, this is nowhere near everyone who contributes to the World Health Organization. However, these are some of the parties who fund it. And Theresa Tam sits on this committee, at the same time she claims to be acting in the best interests of Canadians.

10. Tam A WHO Veteran

How international health emergencies are handled holds lessons for Canadian public health on a range of fronts, from infectious diseases to opioid misuse. That’s the view of Dr. Theresa Tam, who became Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer on an interim basis when Dr. Gregory Taylor retired in December 2016. A competition now underway will determine who will eventually fill the spot, but neither the Privy Council Office, which appoints the position, nor the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) has provided a timeline.

Tam has served on three World Health Organization (WHO) emergency committees: Ebola, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and poliovirus. Emergency committees are convened under the International Health Regulations (IHR) to decide whether disease outbreaks constitute “public health emergencies of international concern” and what measures should be taken to deal with them. Canada has had members on all six of the emergency committees established since the IHR came into force in 2007.

Tam served on several WHO Committees in the 2000’s, and was already “considered a veteran” when appointed to the current role. A Google Scholar search will come up with publications in her name, but they are in the last 20 years or so.

Still it doesn’t help determine what she was doing prior to 2000. Very little information available for the early years.

11. Who Is Theresa Tam Really?

It’s difficult to say. Beyond some very limited information available online, there is next to nothing on her past and early years. Her profile states “growing up in Hong Kong”, and “born in 1965”, yet provides no details.

The schools Tam graduated from don’t have any searchable information on her, which is extremely odd, given her high profile. She graduated medical school in 1989 but doesn’t appear to have obtained a license until 1999. Tam then spent the next 20 years in various Government public health roles, and it seems not to have practiced medicine at all.

Tam did co-author a 2006 report (see CV #12) recommending that vaccination be available to the entire population, and that surveillance apparatus be in place. In fact, she co-authored many research papers in the 2000s. She also participated in the 2010 film “Outbreak” and talked about putting tracking bracelets on, and forced quarantine. Tam spend years in various World Health Organization roles, which is a serious conflict of interest.

While acting as Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer, she sits a World Health Organization Committee. She is part of that Committee along with an ex-Gates Foundation operative. The WHO gets a substantial amount of funding from:

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
World Bank
GAVI Alliance (Gates funded
The Pharma lobby

In fact, if you read through the previous articles in the series, you will see that a lot of the parties funding WHO (GAVI, GlaxoSmithKline, etc…) are the same ones lobbying the Provinces and Federal Government in Canada. In some sense it “isn’t” a conflict of interest, as Tam’s employers are funded by same special interest groups.

Is Theresa Tam even a Canadian citizen? When did she arrive? There’s no specific information available to the public. She’s like a ghost.

April 29, 2020March 1, 2022

CV #12: Pandemic Report From 2006 Recommends Surveillance And Total Vaccinations

As of late January, 2020, Theresa Tam saw very little risk to Canadians, and that human to human transmission was not a threat

1. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

2. Important Links

(1) https://twitter.com/i/status/1221242779923374081</a
(2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theresa_Tam
(3) http://archive.is/e9jwT
(4) Translated Article
(5) https://www.longwoods.com/articles/images/Canada_Pandemic_Influenza.pdf
(6)Tam.Canada_Pandemic_Influenza.2006.report
(7) https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-ottawa-had-a-playbook-for-a-coronavirus-like-pandemic-14-years-ago/
(8) http://archive.is/oBxhf

3. Is Theresa Tam Really Tan Yongshi?

Also check out this link, from an article that identifies Tam as “Tan Yongshi”. Credit is due to Christina Forbes for catching this is the first place.

As the chief health officer, what are the negligent duties that Ms. Tan Yongshi should step down from? In general, there are five aspects. First of all: she should be vigilant about the lack of the new crown epidemic. Wuhan was closed on January 23, and the first patient appeared in Canada on January 25. On January 30, WHO declared the new coronary pneumonia as a public health emergency, and the United States announced the closure of China the next day. At that time, the Chinese community understood the seriousness of the virus and appealed to the government to be vigilant, but Tan was indifferent to it and repeatedly emphasized that Canada’s risk was very low, thus missing the best time for prevention and control. After the closure of the United States, because Canada did not take measures, many travelers detoured to Canada to the United States. During their stay in Canada, they planted hidden dangers for the spread of the virus.

Second: Due to the contempt of Tan Yongshi and the government, the Canadian border epidemic prevention and isolation measures are useless. Among the countries in the world, Canada is the only country that has no airport temperature measurement since the outbreak. In the early stage of the epidemic, all entrants were only verbally asked whether they came from the epidemic area, and there was no requirement for isolation. Nevertheless, most Chinese are consciously isolated for 14 days. In the middle of the outbreak, although the government made a 14-day quarantine request, there was no compulsory follow-up measure. Now that the epidemic has almost peaked, the government has proposed coercive measures, but there is no guarantee of law enforcement, because the RCMP responsible for law enforcement has not issued a ticket. If it is said that Trudeau did this based on Ms. Tan ’s opinion, then Tan did not warn against the strengthening of airport detection and isolation, which is her negligence.

There appear to be translation issues, as it switches names several times. Nonetheless, it does refer to Theresa Tam as Tan Yongshi.

It would be nice to nail this down for certain. Should any reader come across this and have more information, please share. Personally, it would be nice to have more material than: (1) a Wikipedia page; and (2) an article from Google Translate.

To play some devil’s advocate, even if this is the case, it may be attempt to simply adopt a more English sounding name. Many people have done it before.

4. Critique Of 2006 Epidemic Plan

A 2006 report co-written by Dr. Theresa Tam – now the face of Canada’s COVID-19 response – predicted our current situation, and the steps needed to get out of it, with eerie accuracy. But the actual response has been very different

A pandemic sweeps across Canada in one or two months. It is spread not only by the sick, but by people who show no symptoms. There are shortages of medical supplies and the health system struggles to keep up. The peak won’t come for months, and it will be accompanied by a surge in deaths. Soon after, the country will brace for a second wave.

All of this is now true for the COVID-19 crisis, but the aforementioned scenario – a warning – comes from a 2006 federal report on pandemic preparedness. Fourteen years later, its words are eerily accurate.

Despite the prescience of such warnings, Canada and many other governments around the world significantly underestimated the severity of the coronavirus.

As recently as late January, federal officials, including Dr. Tam, said the threat of a major outbreak in Canada was very low, that measures such as travel restrictions weren’t needed, and that the risk of the virus being spread by people without symptoms was highly unlikely.

The article goes on to criticize the Federal Government’s lack of preparedness in many different ways, and in great detail. To their credit, the Globe & Mail is pretty thorough in many ways.

But what they missed in their critique is the propaganda elements within the 2006 report. They may be subtle, but they are there.

5. Contents Of 2006 Report

For vaccine program planning purposes, it is important to be prepared to immunize 100% of the population; however, the actual proportion of the population that will voluntarily seek vaccination will depend on public perception of the risk and the severity of the disease. Therefore, the demand, which will manifest as clinic attendance, will likely vary among jurisdictions and within each jurisdiction as the pandemic evolves. Previous experience with outbreak-related immunization clinics indicates that it would be prudent to prepare for an initial demand of 75% of the target population. It is recommended that planning activities also focus on delivering a two dose program to ensure that the public health response is ready to deal with this possibility.

Tam.Canada_Pandemic_Influenza.2006.report
If you go to section 2.2 (page 60 in the 550 page pdf file), it does point out an interesting fact: that the amount of people who will voluntarily take a vaccination depends on the public perception of risk.

Therefore: one can reasonably conclude from this, if the goal is mass vaccination of the public, it is necessary to get them afraid, and keep them afraid.

The Canadian Pandemic Influenza Plan for the Health Sector (the Plan) consists of an introduction and a background section, followed by the preparedness, response and recovery sections, which are consistent with the general principals of emergency response. Each section aims to assist and facilitate appropriate planning for the health sector at all levels of government for the next influenza pandemic. The Plan and the annexed guidelines, checklists and other documents were developed to assist all jurisdictions with the main components of health sector planning, including surveillance, vaccine programs, use of antivirals, health services, public health measures and communications. The most effective public health intervention to mitigate the impact of a pandemic is through immunization with an effective vaccine against the novel virus, and, to a lesser extent, through the use of antiviral drugs. In addition, comprehensive planning requires that appropriate surveillance capacity is in place, and that the health sector, emergency services and communities as a whole are informed and equipped to deal with a pandemic.

This is from the PREFACE (page 21 in 550 page pdf file). It states that the best solution is a vaccine against the novel virus, and that antivirals are a lesser option. Okay, so every time there is a “novel” virus, we need to break out the vaccine testing?

The preface also states that an appropriate surveillance capacity is needed. Perhaps it could be forcing people to wear bracelets, as Theresa Tam/Tan Yongshi suggests.

The components of the 2004 edition of the Plan included surveillance, vaccine programs, antivirals, health services, emergency services, public health measures and communications. In this edition of the Plan, the emergency services component has been removed; it is now addressed as part of the preparedness for overall emergency management and coordination.

Federal, provincial, territorial and local planners are encouraged to consider the psychosocial implications of pandemic influenza when developing their plans for preparedness and response activities. It is anticipated that a component focusing on psychosocial issues will be added to future versions of the Plan.

Section 2.0 (page 54 of the 550 page pdf) openly states that surveillance and vaccine programs are to be prominent portions of this plan. It seems nothing has changed.

Jurisdictions need to be prepared to rapidly implement or modify enhanced surveillance activities. For the purpose of informing public health risk assessment and response activities, a coordinated and rapid epidemiological investigation that includes the collection, collation and analysis of detailed epidemiological, laboratory and clinical data is required. Further, rapid sharing of data and efficient communication at all levels of government are critical for facilitating a coordinated response.

At the federal level, regular environmental scanning for the detection of potentially significant ILI is conducted using official information sources for influenza surveillance (e.g. World Health Organization [WHO] and government influenza surveillance programs from other countries) and unconfirmed reports from early warning systems (e.g. ProMed and other media scanning software, such as the Global Public Health Intelligence Network).

On an ongoing basis, the newly created national expert Working Group for Vaccine Preventable and Respiratory Infections Surveillance (VPRIS-N) will be assessing surveillance systems and making recommendations for enhancements and improvements for the Interpandemic, Pandemic Alert and Pandemic Periods. Recommendations from this group are being refined on an ongoing basis; current recommendations are included in Annex N, Pandemic Influenza Surveillance Guidelines.

The report in this focuses on the need for new surveillance methods (page 56 of 550 page pdf). While avoiding specifics, it acknowledges that expanding it would be greatly beneficial.

Because surveillance data will drive the pandemic response, it is important that physicians and other health care workers are educated and updated on an ongoing basis about the importance of ILI surveillance as well as their roles in the system. Surveillance systems must be established in advance of a pandemic because there will be little time to augment capacity at the time of a pandemic. At the time of a pandemic, surveillance and laboratory-testing capacity will be reduced (e.g. due to staff absenteeism and potential supply shortages) compared with pre-pandemic periods; only streamlined, resource-efficient systems will continue to function. Special study protocols if required (e.g. to determine epidemiology or to investigate reported adverse events following immunization) at the time of a pandemic must be developed and pretested during the pre-pandemic period, recognizing that refinements may be necessary at the time of a pandemic.

However, on the next page, the report suggests that surveillance systems must be established well in advance, as it may not be possible later. Again, avoiding specifics about what that surveillance would be about?

Vaccination of susceptible individuals is the primary means to prevent disease and death from influenza during an epidemic or pandemic. The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) produces annual recommendations on the use of influenza vaccine in persons who are most at risk for influenza or those who could spread influenza to persons at greatest risk. These interpandemic recommendations are published annually in the Canada Communicable Disease Report. In the event of a pandemic, PIC, which includes representation from NACI, will provide recommendations to F/P/T immunization programs on the development, production and use of the pandemic vaccine, and priority groups for immunization. Efforts should be made to encourage all jurisdictions to adopt the national recommendations on priority groups at the time of a pandemic in order to facilitate equitable access and consistent messaging.

That’s from page 57. “Consistent messaging”??? Does that mean that government officials should keep their talking points consistent in order to prevent the public from picking out contradictions?

From page 59 of the report. In case you were wondering “recombinant vaccines” are ones that are made up of combined genetic material. Think of it as a Franken-vaxx.

Vaccines, when available, will be the primary public health intervention during a pandemic. However at the start of the pandemic, vaccines may not be available as soon as required and two doses of vaccine may be necessary to achieve an adequate immune response. Antivirals (anti-influenza drugs) are effective for both treatment and prophylaxis of annual influenza. These drugs were not available during past pandemics, but are expected to be effective against pandemic strains of the influenza virus. Antivirals will likely be the only virus-specific intervention during the initial pandemic response. Protection afforded by antivirals is virtually immediate and does not interfere with the response to inactivated influenza vaccines.

From page 61. Vaccines are to be the primary defence against an outbreak.

During a pandemic, antiviral strategies should use all the types of effective anti-influenza drugs that are available to Canadians, and should be adaptable to changing disease epidemiology and vaccine availability. If the novel virus is found to be susceptible to amantadine, which is not currently part of the National Antiviral Stockpile, it is recommended that amantadine be used for prophylaxis (not treatment) only. Oseltamivir could be used for both treatment of cases and prophylaxis. The efficacy of oseltamivir and amantadine are approximately equal for the treatment of cases infected with sensitive strains; however, amantadine is recommended exclusively for prophylaxis to minimize the development of amantadine resistance (which would render the drug ineffective) during the pandemic. The timing of the use of antivirals during a pandemic should be guided by local surveillance data.

From page 63. We think antivirals are okay, but only as long as they don’t interfere with vaccines at some point in the future.

This 550 page report is too long to go through in a single article. However, it’s morbid how much: (a) surveillance; and (b) vaccines are woven into the entire report. It reads as if the entire research was to set up a police state and drug everyone.

The Globe & Mail article referenced in the last section complained that the Federal Government was grossly unprepared considering this 2006 report. While true in some sense, the G&M authors apparently didn’t bother to actually read this report before publishing their article.

6. Vaxx/Surveillance Planned From 2004?

How long exactly has this been going on for? How long has this plan been in the works for? It can’t just be a series of random and unrelated events. Has it been going on for much longer that 16 years?

In 2004, this research begins.
In 2006, it is released. It recommends heavy surveillance, and vaccinations for everyone.
In 2010, Theresa Tam/Tan Yongshi participated in the film “Outbreak Of An Epidemic”, which depicted a fictional simulation of the Federal Government responding to a pandemic.
In 2017, Raj Saini (who is pharma lobbied), introduced M-132, to fund drug research and get drugs out to Canadians, and to the world at large.
In October 2019. Event 201 took place. This was the Gates-involved simulation which would see tens of millions of people die in a computer model of an outbreak.

Again, credit to Civilian Intelligence Network for digging up the 2010 film. The whole thing reads like a giant dress rehearsal for the actual shut down.

An interesting observation in the report: voluntary vaccinations will happen in much larger numbers if people feel the threat is real and imminent. That may explain all the dire warnings coming from the government.

As for Theresa Tam, is that her real name? To be fair, even if true, it could be to adopt a more “Anglo” sounding name. Still, it would be nice to know.

April 21, 2020October 23, 2023

Canada’s Vaccine Strategy; Overcoming “Vaccine Hesitancy”; Gates; GAVI; WHO

The Government of Canada has information about vaccines posted online. Lots of it.

1. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

2. Important Links

ANNEXES
who.methodology.stakeholder.results
who.monitoring.evaluating.results
who.GVAP.secretariat.report.2019
who.2019.report.global.vaccine.action.plan
who.immunization.scorecard.estimates.2018

3. Context For This Article

The Canadian Government has adopted significant portions of the WHO’s vaccine agenda, including expanding it to include more and more items. Parliament has approved (see last article) increased funding for research and supply of more vaccines. The Government and Gates’ people seem to be in lockstep ideologically.

Even worse than the government simply going along with this is the propaganda elements. They refer to it as “overcoming vaccine hesitancy”. In practice, this amounts to little more than psychological manipulation in order to convince people that these vaccines are safe. Both the Canadian Government and the World Health Organization engage in this very shady tactic.

For some perspective on the vaccine agenda, let’s look at a partial timeline of events that are happening in Canada and elsewhere.

TIMELINE:
2000 – GAVI (Global Vaccine Alliance) formed
2003 – Nat’l Immunization Strategy Report released
2010 – At WEF, Gates announces $10B to develop vaccines
2014 – Research done into “vaccine hesitancy”
2015 – Journal of Vaccine article on “vaccine hesitancy”
2016 – $25M Committed in 2016 budget for more immunizations
2016 – ID2020 launched by Gates
2017 – M132 passed, to get more funding for big pharma
2018 – GAVI/Crestview lobbies Canadian politicians/bureaucrats
2018 – CANimmunize app launched for smartphones
2018 – HoC Committee on Health approves M-132
2018 – Measuring Behavioural, Social Drivers of vaxx meeting
2019 – Recommendations of M-132 formally adopted
2019 – Working Group (Gates/GAVI) to promote vaxx agenda
2020 – Canada’s economy is unnecessarily crashed
2020 – PM, Premiers talk about mandatory vaxx in Canada

The following sections will cover both initiatives that the Canadian Government has undertaken, as well as the public relations efforts to combat what they refer to as “vaccine hesitancy”.

4. CANimmunize Mobile App

In 2018, the CANImmunize App was released publicly. See this original YouTube video. If putting all your records on some app is becoming more mainstream, what’s to stop there from eventually being a biological record?

The CANimmunize app is promoted on the page. So the Government of Canada sees this as a totally valid and legitimate pathway to take. But don’t worry, as bad as that is, there are worse things to be considered.

There is of course ID2020, which Bill Gates is a major supporter of. He is in favour of creating a digital ID for everyone, and even goes as far as to propose embedding immunization records into people’s skin.

5. Canada Nat’l Immunization Strategy, 2003

nat_immunization_strategy_e.003

Preamble
Over the past several years, the Advisory Committee on Population Health and Health Security (ACPHHS) has supported development of a national approach to addressing immunization issues in Canada. During this period, numerous meetings and consultations with federal, provincial, and territorial (F/P/T) public health representatives and other relevant stakeholders were undertaken to identify and develop collaborative approaches to strengthening immunization in Canada.

The value of this collaborative work was reflected in the February 2003 First Ministers’ Accord on Health Care Renewal, which included direction to Health Ministers to continue their pursuit of a national immunization strategy. The 2003 Federal Budget provided $45 million over five years to assist in the continued pursuit of a national immunization strategy, as directed by First Ministers. Specifically, Health Canada is to receive $5 million in 2003-04 and $10 million in 2004-05 and ongoing. This funding will enable strengthened collaboration with the provinces, territories and key stakeholders to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of immunization programs in Canada, but will not be used for vaccine procurement

All of this seems harmless enough, but in 2003, a report had been released about the Government’s agenda of boosting vaccinations across Canada.

6. Nat’l Immunization Objectives: 2016-2021

Our next steps: NIS objectives 2016 – 2021
While immunization coverage in Canada today is good, we are not reaching any of the coverage goals set in 2005, leaving Canadians vulnerable to preventable illness. Furthermore, while rates of vaccine preventable diseases in Canada are low, recent measles and pertussis outbreaks demonstrate that Canadians are still at risk.

In its 2016 Budget, the Government of Canada committed $25M over five years to increase immunization coverage rates. While all NIS priorities are important, given the shared responsibility for immunization in Canada, and respectful of the collaborative, ongoing work of the NIS, F/P/T partners have worked together to establish a set of short term objectives that can capitalize on this new investment, leverage momentum and build from the 2013 priorities to provide F/P/T focus for the next five years.

This page outlines in extremely broad strokes the agenda for 2016 to 2021

7. CDA Immunization Partnership Fund

Today, not enough Canadians are vaccinated. As a result, Canadians are still at risk for needless illness and death from infectious diseases that could be prevented through vaccination. Recognizing this public health challenge, the Government of Canada committed $25 million in Budget 2016 to increase vaccination coverage in Canada.

The page does however go into considerable detail about “overcoming vaccine hesitancy”. This is short amounts to efforts to CONVINCE people that vaccines are safe.

increasing demand for vaccination
addressing gaps in

knowledge

attitudes

beliefs

And below we will get to some specific efforts being launched.

Creation of a Canadian Immunization Resource Centre (CANVAX)
This project, led by The Canadian Public Health Association, is designed to provide ready access to the latest evidence-based products and tools via the online Canadian Vaccination Evidence Resource and Exchange Centre. The Centre primarily targets those who are responsible for the planning, development and promotion of immunization programs, and aims to increase their understanding, awareness and capacity to enhance vaccine acceptance and uptake in Canada.

Decreasing Vaccine Hesitancy: Enhancing the knowledge and skills of health care professionals
This project, led by the Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS), has developed a workshop and an online education module on vaccine hesitancy. These courses will provide health care providers with a better understanding of the common causes of vaccine hesitancy and the most effective ways to counsel their patients and families to make informed decisions. Additionally, CPS has reinstated the online version of its Education Program for Immunization Competencies (EPIC), which is designed to help health care professionals provide accurate and complete information to their patients about immunization.

Examining and overcoming barriers to vaccine hesitancy in Yukon
Yukon Health and Social Services is implementing a project with the goal of understanding the factors that contribute to vaccine uptake and incomplete/non-vaccination. The data that is gathered will be used to inform evidence-based strategies aimed at improving vaccination service delivery and uptake in Yukon.

HPV Vaccination in Schools: Developing effective strategies for increasing vaccine coverage
The Institute national de santé publique du Québec, in collaboration with the ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux du Québec, will develop and evaluate different strategies designed to increase vaccination coverage rates in select elementary schools within the province. These parent-focused strategies include motivational interviewing, education, decision making tools, and reminders to submit consent forms

Immunize Nunavut: Using data to inform practice
Immunize Nunavut, led by the Department of Health in Nunavut, will improve the quality of vaccination data that will then be used to inform tailored interventions aimed at increasing vaccination coverage rates and to strengthen existing vaccination delivery programs

(COMPLETED)
Enhancing adult immunization coverage in Prince Edward Island
This project, led by the Prince Edward Island Department of Health and Wellness, has implemented a multi-faceted, province-wide initiative to increase adult vaccination rates by working with health care providers to increase their ability to identify under and unvaccinated individuals through the development and use of an Immunization Assessment Tool. As well, this project will enhance health care provider’s ability to communicate more effectively with their patients about vaccination.

(COMPLETED)
Implementation of an educational strategy to promote immunization based on motivational interviewing techniques in maternity hospitals in Québec
In collaboration with provincial partners, the Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et Services de l’Estrie – Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke implemented this project to increase infant vaccination coverage rates in Quebec. To do this, health care providers from the 13 largest maternity wards in Quebec received training in motivational interviewing techniques specific to infant vaccination. Motivational interviewing allows health care providers to better address the concerns of parents who are reluctant to vaccinate their children and to support them in their decision-making process regarding infant vaccination.

What is particularly disturbing here is that about half the programs seem focused on promoting and selling the vaccines. It comes across as propaganda the way they are worded.

However, it is about to get much, MUCH creepier than this. The World Health Organization has done extensive research on it. Parties including UNICEF, the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation all got together to discuss how to better pitch vaccines to the public.

8. Tricks To Beat “Vaccine Hesitancy”

The World Health Organization has done considerable research on the subject of “vaccine hesitancy”. This of course is the natural reaction of people to be reluctant to put needles of unknown substances into their bodies.

Improving vaccination demand and addressing hesitancy
Increasing and maintaining vaccination uptake is vital for vaccines to achieve their success. Addressing low vaccination requires an adequate understanding of the determinants of the problem, tailored evidence-based strategies to improve uptake, and monitoring and evaluation to determine the impact and sustainability of the interventions.

Hesitancy in relation to vaccination may affect motivation, causing people to reject it for themselves or their children. Hesitancy can be caused by individual, group, and contextual influences, as well as any vaccine-specific issues.

Given the potential for hesitancy to rapidly undermine vaccination coverage in specific settings, it is important that all countries take steps to understand both the extent and nature of hesitancy at a local level, on a continuing basis. Accordingly, each country should develop a strategy to increase acceptance and demand for vaccination, which should include ongoing community engagement and trust-building, active hesitancy prevention, regular national assessments of concerns, and crisis response planning

It’s fair to take from this, that the efforts to understand hesitancy do not at all seem rooted in any altruistic motivation. Rather, they seem designed to form the basis to manipulate and otherwise persuade people into taking something that could be extremely harmful to them.

Meeting participants, from left to right: Kerrie Wiley, Neetu Abad, Gilla Shapiro, Alina Lack, Wenfeng Gong, Nick Sevdalis, Julie Leask, Monica Jain, Gustavo Correa, Noel Brewer, Saad Omer, Cornelia Betsch, Charles Wiysonge, Gillian SteelFisher, Lisa Menning, Eve Dubé

In May 2019, a group of people got together to come up with ways to make mass vaccination an easier sell to the public. Read the report and decide whether this is harmless enough.

The World Health Organization has released several other papers and research findings into vaccine hesitancy. Either they are moronic, or they truly think that what they are doing is for the best of humanity.
hesitancy.research
hesitancy.research.02
hesitancy.research.strategies.for.addressing
hesitancy.conclusions.for.addressing

In addition to the above research, there are questionnaires that are available. Asking and probing for certain types of information will give the illusion that you are concerned with the person’s well being.

hesitancy.survey.questionnaires

In January 2015, this paper was released, giving insight into the various reasons people are likely to avoid taking vaccines. It also provided helpful information to convincing the subject that it was still in their best interest.

hesitancy.recommendations.to.correct

There is of course more research available on the subject. But the point is that it has been extensively studied. A cynic might wonder if the WHO spends more effort researching ways to pitch vaccines to the public than they do researching to see if they are actually safe.

9. Vaccine Hesitancy Parallels Climate Scam

Although this may initially seem absurd, there is a parallel between overcoming “vaccine hesitancy” as the WHO and others call it, and selling the climate change scam to the public.

Consider the reviews done of Maxwell Boykoff here, here, and here. Boykoff, in his book Creative Climate Communications, outlined an extensive array of psychological and sociological tactics used to convince people that they were in danger from climate change.

In order words, the research was done into manipulation techniques. The same thing can be seen with vaccine hesitancy research.

10. Canada/WHO Vaccine Targets Of 2025

Now that the anxiety is out of your system, let’s look a bit into Canada’s objectives and targets for mass vaccinations.

As part of the National Immunization Strategy objectives for 2016-2021, vaccination coverage goals and vaccine preventable disease reduction targets were set based on international standards and best practices. The goals and targets are consistent with Canada’s commitment to World Health Organization (WHO) disease elimination targets and Global Vaccine Action Plan, while reflecting the Canadian context.

According to this, Canada’s goals are consistent with the commitments made to the Global Vaccine Alliance Plan, and to disease reduction targets.

Vaccination Coverage Goals by 2025
Vaccination coverage goals were developed for infants, childhood, adolescent and adult vaccines that are publically funded in all provinces and territories (PT). Progress toward the national vaccination coverage goals will be reported based on the data collected using national coverage surveys. Vaccine coverage monitoring at the national level takes into account variations in PT vaccination programs.

Infants and Children
To ensure children are protected through routine vaccination, a high vaccination coverage goal of 95% has been established for all childhood vaccines by two and seven years of age.

This level of vaccination coverage is based on the level of population protection required for measles, the most easily-spread vaccine preventable disease.

Don’t worry. Once you have been cured of your vaccine hesitancy, the Government has an extensive array of pharmaceuticals and medications that you will able to get for free. Don’t worry that many of these are being developed by people who think the world is overpopulated. Nothing to see here.

11. WHO’s Global Vaccine Action Plan

who.2011-2021.vaxx.agenda.full.text.pdf

The catalyst for GVAP was the call by Bill and Melinda Gates at the 2010 World Economic Forum for the next decade to be the ‘Decade of Vaccines’.

Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, established in 2000, was making newer vaccines accessible to the poorest countries, while the Global Immunization Vision and Strategy, launched in 2006, provided a common vision and specific strategies for protecting more people against more diseases. New vaccines were being developed that held even greater promise.

PREFACE
The Global Vaccine Action Plan 2011–2020 (GVAP) was developed to help realize the vision of the Decade of Vaccines, that all individuals and communities enjoy lives free from vaccine preventable diseases. As the decade draws to a close, it is time to take stock of the progress made under GVAP and to apply the lessons learned to the global immunization strategy for the next decade. This report has been prepared for the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) by the SAGE Decade of Vaccines Working Group (Annex 1).

Development of GVAP The Decade of Vaccines Collaboration was launched in 2010 to develop a shared plan to realize this vision. The Collaboration was led by WHO, UNICEF, Gavi, the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, coordinated by the Instituto de Salud Global Barcelona, Spain, and funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. A Leadership Council, comprising executives of the lead organizations and a representative of the African Leaders Malaria Alliance, provided sponsorship and strategic guidance.

HISTORY
Ministers of health unanimously endorsed GVAP at the 2012 World Health Assembly; the monitoring and evaluation framework was endorsed a year later. In the following years, Regional Vaccine Action Plans and national multi-year plans were developed or updated to align with GVAP. African stakeholders went further to build political will for immunization, convening the Ministerial Conference on Immunization in Africa in 2016. This meeting launched the Addis Declaration on Immunization, through which heads of state and ministers of health, finance, education and social affairs as well as local leaders made ten specific commitments to promote health on the African continent through continued investment in immunization.

The global monitoring, evaluation and accountability process was the only aspect of GVAP with dedicated resources. In this effort, GVAP indicators were added to the WHO/UNICEF Joint Reporting Form and SAGE established the Decade of Vaccines Working Group to assess progress and draft recommendations for course corrections. Through the decade, countries reported annually, WHO and partner agencies compiled progress reports, and the SAGE independent assessment report and its recommendations were reviewed annually as a standing agenda item at the World Health Assembly

12. World Economic Forum: 2010 Gates

In 2000, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance was launched at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, with an initial pledge of $750 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Gavi brings together key influencers from the public and private sectors to save children’s lives and protect the population’s health by increasing the equitable use of vaccines in lower-income countries. To date, the Vaccine Alliance has contributed to the immunization of 760 million children, saving more than 13 million lives.

The World Economic Forum has completely embraced the vaccination agenda, and heralds it as some salvation for humanity. it many times provided a platform for Gates and his vaccine push.

13. Would You Trust This Man?

(Bill Gates and depopulation, from 2011, clip from video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc16H3uHKOA

(Bill Gates and depopulation, from 2011, entire video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WFa4bHC0Do

(Bill Gates, improved health care, overpopulation)

(Bill Gates: health and population correlation)

(Bill Gates: vaccines and Ebola virus)

Gates talks about improving the health and well being of mothers in the 3rd world by use of vaccines, and that it would lead to a lower population. However, it seems illogical that improving the health would lead to less children being born. Gates counters that parents will simply choose to have less children if they knew the ones they had would be healthier.

Gates has also spoken about the world being overpopulated, and claims it is causing environmental problems. One should be extremely concerned about taking vaccinations from someone who is interested in depopulation.

The research that the World Health Organization and its partners have done into “vaccine hesitancy” is downright creepy. If the vaccines produced are what they claim to be, it shouldn’t be a hard time pitching them for others to take.

The Canadian Government seems on board with the vaccination agenda. (See previous articles on this subject in Section #1). The Prime Minister and various Premiers openly call for mass vaccines. M-132 passed in Parliament, making it easier to fund future research. The University of Saskatchewan has long conducted research with partners that are Gates and UN funded. The Government has been lobbied at least 20 times on behalf of GAVI by Crestview Strategy, and the bureaucrats themselves seem to be okay with it.

These are very dangerous times indeed.

April 20, 2020December 30, 2021

CV#7: M-132 And International Pharma Research Grants In Canada

1. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

CLICK HERE, for #0: Theresa Tam; archives; articles; lobbying.
CLICK HERE, for #1: piece on Bill Gates, Pirbright, depopulation.
CLICK HERE, for #2: Coronavirus research at U of Saskatchewan.
CLICK HERE, for #3: Gates; WHO, ID2020; GAVI; Vaccines.
CLICK HERE, for #4: Gates using proxies to push vaxx agenda.
CLICK HERE, for #5: Crestview Strategy, GAVI’s lobbying firm.
CLICK HERE, for #6: people GAVI/Crestview lobbied follow Gates.

http://www.lobbycanada.gc.ca

2. HESA Submissions, Evidence, Reports

Submissions Lodged
hesa.Structural.Genomics.Consortium.submission
hesa.Medicines.Patent.Pool.2018
hesa.Doctors.Without.Borders.2018
hesa.Canadian.Institutes.Of.Health.Research.2018
hesa.Fowke.Keith.University.Manitoba.2018
hesa.University.College.London.drug.prices.2018
hesa.Drugs.For.Neglected.Diseases.Initiative.2018
hesa.Moon.Suerie.2018
hesa.Yusuf.Salim.mcmaster
hesa.FIND.tb.alliance.gates.gavi.unitaid
hesa.Vlassoff.Carol.2018
hesa.Universities.Allied.For.Essential.Medecines.2018
hesa.Bruyere.Research.Institute.2018
hesa.Molyneux.David.2018

LINK To Parliamentary Study Main Page

3. Federally Funded Health Research: M-132

For a speech on passing M-132.
The text is below

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.

4. Parliamentary Committee Meetings

Dates Of Meetings
Thursday, September 27, 2018
Hesa.2018.September.27.evidence.transcript

Tuesday, October 2, 2018
Hesa.2018.October.2.evidence.transcript

Thursday, October 4, 2018
Hesa.2018.October.4.evidence.transcript

Tuesday, October 16, 2018
Hesa.2018.October.16.evidence.transcript

Thursday, October 18, 2018
Hesa.2018.October.18th.evidence.transcript

Tuesday, October 23, 2018
Hesa.2018.October.23.evidence.transcript

Thursday, October 25, 2018
Hesa.2018.October.25.evidence.transcript

5. Reports Released To The Commons

In Canada and around the world, there is rising concern that innovative drugs produced by pharmaceutical companies are no longer affordable and are placing increasing strain on health care budgets. Policy makers have begun to examine ways that public funding for pharmaceutical research and development could address this issue. On 8 November 2017, the House of Commons adopted Private Members’ Business M-132, which requested that the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health (the Committee) “undertake a study on ways of increasing benefits to the public resulting from federally funded research, with the goals of lowering drug costs and increasing access to medicines, both in Canada and globally.”

On 16 and 18 October 2018, the Committee held two meetings as part of this study and heard from a range of witnesses including health researchers, health research funding organizations, patient groups and civil society organizations. Drawing on witness testimony and written submissions, this report examines the role the federal government can play in fostering pharmaceutical research and development both in Canada and globally to ensure that pharmaceutical drugs are accessible and affordable.

Note: Recommendations can be found starting at page 20 in the 2018 report released to the House of Commons.

HOUSE OF COMMONS STANDING COMMITTEE ON HEALTH CALLS ON THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA TO FOSTER PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BOTH IN CANADA AND GLOBALLY THROUGH OPEN SCIENCE
Ottawa, November 26, 2018 –

Bill Casey, Chair of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health, presented the Committee’s twentieth report today entitled, Towards Open Science: Promoting Innovation in Pharmaceutical Research and Development and Access to Affordable Medications both in Canada and Abroad.

The Committee’s study is in response to Member of Parliament Raj Saini’s Private Members’ Motion M-132, which requested that the Committee, “undertake a study on ways of increasing benefits to the public resulting from federally funded research, with the goals of lowering drug costs and increasing access to medicines, both in Canada and globally.”

In presenting the report to the House, Chair Bill Casey highlighted that “in our testimony, we heard loud and clear that more needs to be done to strengthen research and innovation in Canada. I thank Mr. Saini for bringing forth M-132, and for his efforts in ensuring that the Health Committee can hear why Canada must continue to be a leader in this field.”

Drawing on witness testimony heard over the course of two meetings held on 16 and 18 October 2018 and on 23 written submissions, the Committee’s report examines how increased federal investment in health research, across the continuum from fundamental to clinical research, would support the development of new medicines. However, witnesses also emphasized the importance of ensuring that federal funding in pharmaceutical research and development must also result in the creation of drugs that are affordable in Canada and abroad. Witnesses suggested that this could be achieved by fostering the creation of innovative models of pharmaceutical research that prioritize open science in both the development of new drugs and the repurposing of existing drugs. Witnesses explained that the Government of Canada could lead the way by developing a framework that sets priorities for pharmaceutical research and development and promotes open science through collaboration and leveraging of funding across governments, universities, health charities and private industry.

The Committee agrees with these findings and has included in its report nine recommendations that it believes will support the transformation of pharmaceutical research and development in Canada.

The announcement of the press release is here

Recommendation 1
That the Government of Canada create a specific funding mechanism for the development of clinical trial research and infrastructure in Canada through the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
.
Recommendation 2
That the Government of Canada increase its funding for clinical trial research and infrastructure in Canada to 10% of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research’s budget to be on par with jurisdictions leading in this area, such as the United Kingdom and the United States.
.
Recommendation 3
That the Government of Canada explore ways to incentivize clinical trial research in Canada for pharmaceutical drugs and incentivize and support the production of those drugs in Canada at an advantaged price for Canada and provide venture capital for the proponent.
.
Recommendation 4
That the Canadian Institutes of Health Research attach a Global Access Licensing requirement to recipients of its research funding that wish to commercialize their research findings.
.
Recommendation 5
That the Canadian Institutes of Health Research include in its existing research and development programs support for the development of open science models of drug discovery.
.
Recommendation 6
That the Canadian Institutes of Health Research develop a framework for open science that supports collaboration and the leveraging of research funding among different partners in pharmaceutical research and development, including health charities, universities, governments, and private industry.
.
Recommendation 7
That Health Canada develop regulatory incentives for pharmaceutical companies that commit to open access to their research data and affordable prices for their products.
.
Recommendation 8
That the Government of Canada undertake a strategic review of its health-related research funding priorities across departments and agencies to enhance coordination, including Health Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Global Affairs Canada, and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada.
.
Recommendation 9
That the Government of Canada explore the feasibility of the public manufacturing of generic medicines.

In the follow-up report, the recommendations were formally adopted.

REPORTS TO PARLIAMENT
hesa.november.2018.report.to.parliament
hesa.government.response.march.2019

6. Committee Members

As provided by the report, these are the names and ranks of the Committee.

STANDING COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

CHAIR

Bill Casey

VICE-CHAIRS

Marilyn Gladu (lobbied by GAVI)

Don Davies

MEMBERS

Ramez Ayoub
Doug Eyolfson
Raj Grewal
Ben Lobb
Ron McKinnon
John Oliver (Parliamentary Secretary — Non-Voting Member)
Sonia Sidhu
Len Webber

OTHER MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT WHO PARTICIPATED

Randy Boissonnault
Terry Duguid
Randy Hoback
Tom Kmiec
Christine Moore
Raj Saini (lobbied by GAVI)
Dave Van Kesteren

CLERK OF THE COMMITTEE

Marie-Hélène Sauvé

Why is the list of the Committee Members here? Well, once you see who some of the connections are, it will likely make the report findings a lot more suspicious.

7. Committee Members & Pharma Lobbying

The above screenshots came from information provided in the Office of the Lobbying Commissioner of Canada. These are far from exhaustive, but show a snapshot at the lobbying that is going on in Canada. Members of this Parliamentary Committee are being lobbied by various drug companies. It’s not difficult to see that this is done in order to influence them.

8. Conflict Of Interest Here

The same committee members who are recommending that Canada undertake more research for pharmaceuticals are the same ones who are being lobbied by pharmaceutical companies. It’s not difficult to piece it together.

April 13, 2020December 29, 2022

CV #4: Gates Foundation Lobbied Trudeau (Using Proxies) Into Accepting Vaccine Agenda

(Bill Gates predicts no more mass gathering until vaccine developed.

(See 1:30 mark in this, or original video)

1. Context For This Article

Recently, PM Trudeau has echoed Bill Gates’ sentiments that mass vaccination of people is necessary for any sense of normalcy to return. While there has been speculation about this link, there has so far been no proof of collusion between Gates and Trudeau.

It’s true that there has been collusion. However, Gates did not (directly) lobby the Canadian Government. The used proxies to do this. Specifically, here are the connections:

(a) The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation helped found GAVI, the Global Vaccine Alliance in 1999. The foundation donated $750 million at the time, and continues to fund it regularly.

(b) GAVI sought the services of a lobbying firm called Crestview Strategy. Crestview used 2 of their employees, Jason Clark, and Zakery Blais, for the assignment.

(c) Clark and Blais have lobbied the Canadian Government on at least 19 occasions since 2018 on various “health” matters, on behalf of GAVI. One more was conducted by Jennifer Babcock, who appears to have left the firm. All of this can be immediately verified by looking up the records in the Office of the Lobbying Commissioner.

(d) Clark and Blais have connections to the Liberal Party of Canada. Clark volunteered in 2015 for Ottawa area Liberal candidates, and Blais is a former assistant to the (now) Attorney General David Lametti.

2. GAVI Funded By Gates Foundation

This is probably the most well known link in the chain. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation helped found GAVI, the Global Vaccine Alliance in 1999, and has made regular contributions to it. The foundation essentially runs the show.

The Global Vaccine Alliance, as the name suggests, is an organization devoted to pushing vaccinations on the public all across the world. Bill Gates has long been a proponent of mass vaccinations.

3. GAVI Lobbying CDN Gov’t Since 2018

If you go onto the Lobby Canada website, you can see what lobbyists have been talking to which government officials, who they work for, when they spoke, and what the business was. This is laid out “communications reports”

Dates of Communications Reports
(1) 2018 March 8
(2) 2018 March 9
(3) 2018 March 9
(4) 2018 October 9
(5) 2018 October 9
(6) 2018 October 9
(7) 2018 October 10
(8) 2018 October 10
(9) 2018 October 10
(10) 2019 June 11
(11) 2019 June 11
(12) 2019 June 11
(13) 2019 June 12
(14) 2019 June 12
(15) 2019 June 12
(16) 2020 January 28
(17) 2020 January 29
(18) 2020 January 29
(19) 2020 January 29
(20) 2020 January 30

No, these aren’t duplications. The registry indicates multiple reports on these dates.

These are just the 20 reports that are on file with the Office of the Lobbying Commissioner. It’s fair to assume that there have been many, many more talks that aren’t documented.

4. Crestview Strategy Lobbies For GAVI

Crestview Annual Return (1)
Crestview Registered office & Directors (3)
Crestview.Certificate.Of.Amalgamation (2)
crestview.directors.change.2019

Crestview Strategy effectively represents the interests of corporations, not-for-profits and industry associations to achieve results with governments around the world.

Across Canada and around the world, the rules that govern the government relations industry are changing. The new higher standard that regulates access to information and political contributions have fundamentally changed the public policy dialogue and improved how citizens, companies and associations advocate their interests to elected representatives.

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.

This is in the government relations page of Crestview Strategy. At least they are open about trying to influence governments and public policy.

5. Crestview Lobbyist Zakery Blais

Zakery Blais is a Consultant with Crestview Strategy. With a focus on Canada-U.S. relations and international development, Zakery services clients globally.

His experience spans both the public and private sectors. He previously worked as a Legislative Assistant to a Canadian Member of Parliament, providing strategic political and communications advice. Prior to joining Crestview Strategy, Zakery also worked in various capacities in public affairs, including as an analyst focused on the energy and natural resources sectors.

That is from his profile on the Crestview Strategy webpage.

Fun fact: Blais was an assistant for David Lametti, a former Parliamentary Secretary, and currently the Attorney General of Canada. While Crestview CLAIMS it doesn’t operate on a who-you-know basis, the current lobbyist pushing this is the Attorney General’s former assistant. Not exactly arms length, is it?

6. Crestview Lobbyist Jason Clark

Prior to joining the Crestview Team, Jason has worked in public policy development and advocacy and engagement campaigns, most recently for Engineers Without Borders Canada. Since arriving in Ottawa he has worked work a wide range of Canadian Non-profit organizations on international development and trade issues. Previously, Jason managed one of the largest public engagement campaigns on climate change, energy and sustainability in Great Britain, working in partnership with all levels of government, business, industry and trade associations, the public sector and civil society. Jason has also worked with female entrepreneurs and social enterprises in Lesotho, Africa.

[Jason Clark] volunteered for several Ottawa-area Liberal Party of Canada candidates during the 2015 election campaign.

That is from his profile page with Crestview Strategy.

7. Rob Silver, Katie Telford’s Husband

Liberal strategist and former pundit Rob Silver said Monday he has left the government relations firm he helped create, citing his wife’s position as Justin Trudeau’s chief of staff.

“Effective Dec. 31, 2015 I am no longer a shareholder or employee of Crestview Strategy,” Silver said in an email Monday afternoon.

Silver was a partner in the Toronto- and Ottawa-based public affairs agency that, among other things, lobbies the federal government on behalf of clients.

Rob Silver, husband of Katie Telford, Trudeau’s Chief-of-Staff, helped start up Crestview Strategy, the lobbying firm that GAVI hired to push the vaccine agenda. Also, see this $800 million grant from the Canadian taxpayers, instigated by Crestview.

8. Lobbying Has Netted Results

Canada is pledging $600 million to the third replenishment of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and committing $47.5 million annually over four years to support the Global Polio Eradication Initiative’s end-game strategy.

Quick facts
Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, is a global health partnership representing stakeholders in immunization from both private and public sectors. Since 2000, Gavi has supported the immunization of 760 million children and saved more than 13 million lives.

Since 2002, Canada has provided more than $1 billion in funding to Gavi, including $500 million for the current period from 2016 to 2020.

The Global Polio Eradication Initiative was established in 1988; since then, 2.5 billion children have been vaccinated as a result. The world has never been closer to eradicating polio, but the job is not done. With continued transmission in Afghanistan and Pakistan, we cannot afford to be complacent.

The funding announced today is part of Canada’s renewed commitment to global health as announced by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at the Women Deliver Conference in June 2019. The Government of Canada committed to raise its funding to $1.4 billion annually by 2023 to support women’s and girls’ health around the world.

Let’s keep that pharma money coming, shall we? Canada makes another announcement to keep those pharma dollars rolling in.

9. Gates Foundation Lobbying Canadian Gov’t

Neither Bill Gates personally, nor his Foundation may have their name on the efforts to lobby the Canadian Government, but they are behind it. GAVI, the Global Vaccine Alliance, is funded by the Gates Foundation, and they have the same ideological goals.

GAVI is using Crestview Strategy to lobby on their behalf, and both main lobbyists, Jason Clark and Zakery Blais, have ties to the Liberal Party of Canada. Clark volunteered in 2015 for Ottawa region candidates, and Blais worked for the (current) Attorney General, David Lametti.

Gates is using GAVI (and LPC operatives-turned-lobbyists) to push the vaccine agenda.

It doesn’t get much more obvious than this.

(1) https://canucklaw.ca/mastercard-is-the-final-boss-review/
(2) https://www.gavi.org/operating-model/gavis-partnership-model/bill-melinda-gates-foundation
(3) http://archive.is/DHNXn
(4) https://www.crestviewstrategy.ca
(5) http://archive.is/aFSsx
(6) https://www.crestviewstrategy.ca/zakery-blais
(7) http://archive.is/q3Jzh
(8) https://www.linkedin.com/in/zakery-blais-13a76b118/
(9) https://www.crestviewstrategy.ca/jason-clark.
(10) http://archive.is/nkiou
(11) https://www.crestviewstrategy.ca/government-relations
(12) http://archive.is/Vss4p
(13) https://www.canada.ca/en/global-affairs/news/2020/05/minister-gould-announces-funding-for-global-vaccinations.html

1. Important Links

2. Context For This Article

3. “Candidate” McKenna Stayed On CLA Board

4. McKenna’s Posts On CLA Blog

5. CDN Lawyers Abroad A.K.A. Level Justice

6. CLA/Level Is Registered Charity

7. Little Info On Elections Canada Site

8. Global Internship Program

9. What This Group Does

Share this:

Like this:

1. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

2. Important Links

3. Constructing A Timeline

4. Tam’s CPSO Profile Page

5. No Practice Information In Profile

6. Identical Photo/Profile With WHO

7. WHO Committee Tam Serves On

8. Pharma Funding World Health Org., 2017

9. Pharma Funding World Health Org., 2018

10. Tam A WHO Veteran

11. Who Is Theresa Tam Really?

Share this:

Like this:

1. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

2. Important Links

3. Is Theresa Tam Really Tan Yongshi?

4. Critique Of 2006 Epidemic Plan

5. Contents Of 2006 Report

6. Vaxx/Surveillance Planned From 2004?

Share this:

Like this:

1. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

2. Important Links

3. Context For This Article

4. CANimmunize Mobile App

5. Canada Nat’l Immunization Strategy, 2003

6. Nat’l Immunization Objectives: 2016-2021

7. CDA Immunization Partnership Fund

8. Tricks To Beat “Vaccine Hesitancy”

9. Vaccine Hesitancy Parallels Climate Scam

10. Canada/WHO Vaccine Targets Of 2025

11. WHO’s Global Vaccine Action Plan

12. World Economic Forum: 2010 Gates

13. Would You Trust This Man?

Share this:

Like this:

1. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

2. HESA Submissions, Evidence, Reports

3. Federally Funded Health Research: M-132

4. Parliamentary Committee Meetings

5. Reports Released To The Commons

6. Committee Members

7. Committee Members & Pharma Lobbying

8. Conflict Of Interest Here

Share this:

Like this:

1. Context For This Article

2. GAVI Funded By Gates Foundation

3. GAVI Lobbying CDN Gov’t Since 2018

4. Crestview Strategy Lobbies For GAVI

5. Crestview Lobbyist Zakery Blais

6. Crestview Lobbyist Jason Clark

7. Rob Silver, Katie Telford’s Husband

8. Lobbying Has Netted Results

9. Gates Foundation Lobbying Canadian Gov’t

Share this:

Like this: