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”

(A) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-0-corona-plandemic-lobbying-deleted-resources-cl-listings-theresa-tam-canadas-hoaxer-zero
(B) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-1-coronavirus-patent-by-pirbright-institute-funded-by-gates-foundation-climate-change-scam-15/
(C) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-2-coronavirus-research-at-usask-gates-foundation-undp-funded-ivi-douglas-richardson/
(D) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-3-bill-gates-vaccines-un-who-gavi-id2020-us-cdc-all-involved/
(E) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-4-gates-foundation-lobbied-trudeau-using-proxies-into-accepting-vaccine-agenda/
(F) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-5-crestview-strategy-the-lobbying-firm-advocating-for-gavis-vaxx-agenda/
(G) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-6-many-bureaucrats-gavi-crestview-strategy-lobbied-already-followed-gates/
(H) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-7-m-132-and-international-pharma-research-grants-in-canada/

2. Important Links

(1) https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/immunization-vaccine-priorities/national-immunization-strategy.html
(2) http://archive.is/TBv94
(3) http://www.phn-rsp.ca/index-eng.php
(4) http://archive.is/DbTAe
(5) https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/publications/healthy-living/national-immunization-strategy-objectives-2016-2021.html
(6) http://archive.is/m3eBE
(7) https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/immunization-vaccine-priorities/immunization-partnership-fund.html
(8) http://archive.is/wrdrI
(9) https://www.who.int/immunization/programmes_systems/vaccine_hesitancy/en/
(10) http://archive.is/M2VR8
(11) https://www.canimmunize.ca/en/home
(12) http://archive.is/2IsV6
(13) https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/immunization-vaccine-priorities/national-immunization-strategy/vaccination-coverage-goals-vaccine-preventable-diseases-reduction-targets-2025.html
(14) http://archive.is/CxhM0
(15) https://www.who.int/
(16) http://archive.is/6uTwK
(17) https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/329097/WHO-IVB-19.07-eng.pdf?ua=1
(18) https://www.weforum.org/our-impact/saving-lives-through-vaccinations
(19) http://archive.is/S2yjZ
(20) CLICK HERE, for Reuters, on Gates 2010 WEF announcement.
(21) http://archive.is/Eg2Ty
(22) nat_imm_strat.2003.report

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.

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.

    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

    CV #3: Gates’ Vaccines; UN, WHO, GAVI, ID2020, US CDC All Involved

    If you go onto the United Nations main page and type “BILL GATES VACCINE” into the search engine, you will reach an astonishing 53,271 results. Bill Gates and the UN have long collaborated (or is it colluded) in the vaccination business.

    Daniel Kress, a representative for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, was a panelist on an April 10, 2015 conference with the UN Population Division.

    1. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

    (A) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-0-corona-plandemic-lobbying-deleted-resources-cl-listings-theresa-tam-canadas-hoaxer-zero
    (B) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-1-coronavirus-patent-by-pirbright-institute-funded-by-gates-foundation-climate-change-scam-15/
    (C) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-2-coronavirus-research-at-usask-gates-foundation-undp-funded-ivi-douglas-richardson/

    2. Important Links

    (1) https://news.un.org/en/story/2012/09/421482-leaders-un-event-unite-behind-final-push-eradicate-polio
    (2) http://archive.is/sqIGu
    (3) https://ebolaresponse.un.org/un-health-agency-announces-start-ebola-vaccine-testing-worst-affected-areas-guinea
    (4) http://archive.is/sqIGu
    (5) https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/events/expert-group/22/2_global_health.asp
    (6) http://archive.is/K6YVP
    (7) https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/events/expert-group/22/2_global_health.asp
    (8) http://archive.is/MBxUd
    (9) https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/11/545652-worlds-first-malaria-vaccine-set-2018-rollout-africa-after-un-health-agency
    (10) http://archive.is/sTltI
    (11) https://news.un.org/en/story/2018/01/1001681
    (12) http://archive.is/11ljQ
    (13) https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/events/expert-group/28/index.asp
    (14) http://archive.is/rm02e
    (15) https://www.gavi.org
    (16) https://www.gavi.org/our-alliance/operating-model/gavis-partnership-model
    (18) http://archive.is/JTnyH
    (19) https://www.gavi.org/governance/gavi-board/composition
    (20) http://archive.is/ZezEK
    (21) https://www.gavi.org/investing-gavi/funding/donor-profiles/bill-melinda-gates-foundation
    (22) https://www.gavi.org/investing-gavi/funding/donor-profiles/elma-vaccines-and-immunization-foundation
    (24) http://archive.is/zYVbb
    (25) https://www.gavi.org/news-resources/document-library/annual-contributions-and-proceeds
    (26) http://archive.is/7q2oO
    (27) https://www.who.int/immunization/immunization_agenda_2030/en/
    (28) http://archive.is/Z6e7u
    (29) https://id2020.org/
    (30) http://archive.is/qTlBr
    (31) https://www.who.int/workforcealliance/members_partners/member_list/gates/en/
    (32) https://www.who.int/workforcealliance/members_partners/member_list/gates/en/
    (33) http://archive.is/25Nxs

    3. Context For This Piece

    Bill Gates doesn’t believe his children should be vaccinated, yet pushes vaccines throughout the world. This should tell you what he really believes.

    However, what is truly mind boggling is the scale which his organization — the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation — has been active and financing vaccines elsewhere. The included sections are just a small sample of what he has been up to.

    It’s also chilling that the UN Population Division (yes, that is a real thing), holds regular conferences on global population. So-called “experts” are invited to participate and take it in. Representatives from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have attended such events.

    Bill Gates has many startling connections. In fact, much of the current crisis all seems to tie back to him and his foundation. Those will be outlined in more detail.

    4. April 2015 Population Control Meeting

    The Report for this conference is right here. Pretty chilling to see the Gates Foundation on the panel, considering the push vaccines to “save lives”

    During the next 15 years, the period covered by the post-2015 United Nations development agenda, demographic trends will have varied and profound implications on our ability to achieve sustainable development, suggesting the potential for large returns to investment in dedicated research on population and development aimed at informing innovative and evidence-based policies.

    In order to review gaps and future priorities in demographic research to support the implementation of the post-2015 development agenda, the Population Division convened an expert group meeting on “The post-2015 era: Implications for the global research agenda on population and development” at the United Nations in New York on 10 April 2015. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss research priorities on population and development that merit global attention over the next 15 years. In identifying key knowledge gaps in future demographic trends and their implications for global sustainable development, the results of the meeting were intended to assist the international community in identifying a global, policy-relevant research agenda on population and development.

    The meeting featured a keynote address on overarching population and development research priorities, six substantive sessions on changing age structures and their implications for development (one session each on youth and ageing), population and health (one session on global health and one on reproductive health), sustainable urbanization, and international migration and development; and a concluding session. Researchers and academics, experts from Governments and international organizations, and representatives from donors and civil society reflected on the following three discussion questions in each session:

    Too long to detail here, but the Gates Foundation was a party to the meeting, and population development and demographic trends were discussed.

    Among the contributors were:
    Robert Black Professor and Director Institute for International Programs Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Baltimore, Maryland

    Prabhat Jha Director Centre for Global Health Research University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

    Daniel Kress Deputy Director Integrated Delivery Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Seattle, Washington

    Lauren Sorkin Platform Director 100 Resilient Cities Rockefeller Foundation New York, New York

    Amy Tsui Professor Bill & Melinda Gates Institute for Population and Reproductive Health Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Baltimore, Maryland.

    John Wilmoth Director, Population Division United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs New York, New York

    5. Nov 2018 Population Expert Meeting

    For some context, the Report Of The Meeting was held on November 1/2, 2018. This was just a month before the UN Global Migration Compact was to be signed, helping to facilitate an estimated 258 million migrants to the West.

    Important progress had been achieved in reducing mortality of specific age groups and certain population groups, including children and women. While much had been achieved in curtailing the HIV/AIDS epidemic during the last 25 years, there was a need to analyse inequality in accessing health services for different population groups in order to identify appropriate responses. Universal health coverage, one of the targets of the 2030 agenda, would be instrumental in this respect.

    Participants identified the need for reducing inequalities in accessing health and allowing for different approaches within and between countries. “Standing still” was not an option: continuous efforts were required to address the challenges in health and other related fields. Participants called for greater attention to mental health and health impacts from environmental change, issues that would become important challenges in many countries. Participants raised the issue of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) as well as individual risk behaviour and health and discussed the challenges related to old-age labour force participation, such as health status and the competition between young and older workers.

    Participants
    Invited experts
    Mr. David Baxter Baxter Consulting Group San Francisco, USA
    Ms. Ann Biddlecom Guttmacher Institute New York, USA
    Mr. John Bongaarts Population Council New York, USA
    Mr. Win Brown Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Seattle, USA
    Ms. Suzana Cavenaghi Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
    Mr. Alex Ezeh Drexel University Philadelphia, USA
    Mr. Baochang Gu Renmin University of China Beijing, China
    Mr. Hongtao Hu Partners in Population and Development Beijing, China
    Mr. Prabhat Jha University of Toronto Toronto, Canada
    Mr. Benoit Kalasa United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) New York, USA
    Ms. Ellen Percy Kraly Colgate University Hamilton, New York, USA
    Ms. Nyovani Madise African Institute for Development Policy Lilongwe, Malawi
    Mr. Sikufele Mubita Central Statistical Office Lusaka, Zambia
    Mr. Fabrizio Natale Joint Research Centre, European Commission Ispra, Italy
    Ms. Holly Reed City University of New York (CUNY) New York, USA
    Ms. Rachel Snow United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) New York, USA
    Ms. Barbara Sow United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) New York, USA
    Mr. Joseph Teye University of Ghana Accra, Ghana
    Mr. Jorge Bravo United Nations New York, USA
    Mr. Bela Hovy United Nations New York, USA
    Ms. Vladimira Kantorova United Nations New York, USA
    Mr. Victor Gaigbe-Togbe United Nations New York, USA
    Mr. Patrick Gerland United Nations New York, USA
    Ms. Karoline Schmid United Nations New York, USA
    Mr. Frank Swiaczny United Nations New York, USA
    Mr. John Wilmoth United Nations New York, USA
    Mr. Guangyu Zhang United Nations New York, USA

    Getting health care for everyone? Eliminating diseases for these millions of migrants on the move? If only there was someone willing to finance vaccines and vaccine research. Oh wait, there is.

    6. Oral Polio Vaccines

    The World Health Organization (WHO) spearheads the GPEI, whose ultimate success would mark an early milestone in the Decade of Vaccines, which in turn represents a global vision to provide all children with the vaccines they need.

    “No single one of us can bring this long, hard drive over the last hurdle,” WHO Director-General Margaret Chan said. “But together we can.”

    A major GPEI donor is the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, whose co-chair, Bill Gates, also spoke of the significance eradicating polio would have for combating other diseases.

    “When we defeat polio, it will motivate us to aim for other great health and development milestones,” he said.

    It’s a bit disturbing that the photo for the article shows a child being force fed a pill. This is the 2012 push to get polio vaccines into Nigerian and Afghanistan.

    7. Ebola Testing In Guinea

    “The VSV-EBOV vaccine was selected for the planned trial based on a framework of parameters developed by the WHO Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee on Ebola Experimental interventions,” it said. “Criteria included acceptable safety profile, induction of appropriate immune responses, including neutralizing antibodies, and the timely availability of sufficient supplies of vaccine doses.

    WHO, the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and vaccine alliance GAVI are collaborating with the affected countries to develop plans and strategies for large-scale introduction, should this be needed.

    WHO said the vaccines’ manufacturers have assured that enough vaccine will be available in the coming months and that financial resources are in place to procure and make vaccines available in the affected countries.

    In 2015, an ebola vaccine was pushed onto Guinea. Apparently, initial 2014 clinical testing went well, so they released it to the general public.

    8. Pentavalent, 5-in-1 Vaccine

    The vaccine, pentavalent, protects against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, and Haemophilus influenzae type B, all of which are potentially deadly infections. The doses will be distributed to transitioning countries and those supported by Gavi, the international organization that works with public and private sectors to bring vaccinations to children living in the world’s poorest countries.

    Since 2001, a strong collaboration between the Gavi Alliance Partners, which includes UNICEF, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the World Health Organization (WHO), has generated great success.

    Pentavalent will now be available for about $0.84 a dosage, a price that is also available to governments that self-finance the procurement. The new pricing is expected to generate more than $366 million in savings for donors and governments.

    According to Shanelle Hall, Director of UNICEF’s supply and procurement headquarters, as many as 90 per cent of children under the age of five who die from vaccine-preventable diseases are currently living in countries where donors are no longer fully funding vaccination supplies. “For the most vulnerable children in the world, pricing can make a difference between life and death,” she stated in a news release.

    In 2016, Pentavalent was released on the public, which was supposed to simultaneously vaccinate against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, and Haemophilus influenzae type B.

    9. Malaria Vaccine Announced

    “The pilot deployment of this first-generation vaccine marks a milestone in the fight against malaria,” stated Dr. Pedro Alonso, Director of the WHO Global Malaria Programme, adding that these pilot projects will provide valuable evidence from real-life settings to make informed decisions on whether to deploy the vaccine on a wide scale.

    The vaccine, known as RTS,S, acts globally against the most deadly malaria parasite P. falciparum, very common in Africa. Based on the results from clinical trials, the new vaccine will provide partial protection against malaria in young children.

    The vaccine was developed through a partnership between GlaxoSmithKline and the PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative (MVI), with support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and from a network of African research centres.

    Full funding – $15 million for the malaria vaccine pilots – for the first phase of the programme, has already been received, and an additional commitment of about $37 million from partners is expected to cover the first four years.

    “WHO recognizes and commends the leadership and support of all funding agencies and partners who have made this achievement possible,” said Dr Jean-Marie Okwo-Bele, Director of the WHO Department of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals.

    In 2016 it was announced that a malaria vaccine would be released in 2018. Gates and his many partners are listed in the article. Malaria is said to be one of the biggest killers of children.

    10. 500M To Be Vaxxed Against Measles

    “Eliminating measles would avert half a million deaths, while controlling rubella and Congenital Rubella Syndrome (CRS) would promote health of pregnant woman and the infants they give life to,” said Dr. Poonam Khetrapal Singh, Regional Director for the World Health Organization (WHO) South-East Asia, referring to the ‘big six;’ Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal and Thailand.

    Immunization programme managers of the ‘big six’ countries, along with WHO, UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Vaccine Alliance (GAVI), Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Centre for Disease control are deliberating challenges, experiences and lessons learned in immunization in the Region that can be harnessed to eliminate measles and control rubella / congenital rubella syndrome (CRS).

    “This dynamism and positive exchange is at the very core of south-south and triangular cooperation,” said Dr. Khetrapal Singh, who announced measles elimination and rubella / CRS control as one of her flagship programme at the start of her tenure in 2014.

    The World Health Organization announced in 2018 that vaccinating against measles would prevent at least 500,00 deaths. The research and development is funded by the usual players, including the Gates Foundation.

    These 5 examples shown are just a sample of what the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is involved with. There are many more examples.

    11. GAVI: Global Vaccine Alliance

    GAVI’s founding partners are:

    • Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
    • UNICEF
    • World Health Organization
    • World Bank

    12. Who’s Actually Funding GAVI?

    Gates Foundation Contributions To GAVI

    As a founding partner of Gavi, the Gates Foundation has brought international attention to the cause of immunisation and has made several commitments to Gavi, totalling USD 4.1 billion to-date. In 2000, the foundation made an initial USD 750 million commitment to the Vaccine Fund, which was catalytic in bringing other donors to support vaccine delivery and creating Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance.

    In February 2007, the foundation committed USD 50 million to launch the first AMC to expedite the development and availability of pneumococcal vaccines. In June 2011, the Gates Foundation committed over USD 1 billion to Gavi over the period 2011–2015; of this commitment, USD 50 million was reserved for the Gavi Matching Fund. An additional, USD 250 million of challenge grant moneys were pledged to match additional funds raised earlier by other donors.

    In June 2014 the Gates Foundation committed an additional USD 241 million to Gavi towards its complementary role on polio eradication including support for IPV over the period 2015–2018. This is complementing GPEI’s work on strengthening routine immunisation and introducing inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) in Gavi-supported countries.
    At the Berlin Pledging Conference 2015, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation announced USD 1.55 billion for Gavi’s next 2016–2020 strategic period.

    The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has to date poured over $4 billion into this group. But who else is involved?

    Mastercard Contributions To GAVI

    Mastercard is a technology company in the global payments industry committed to leading the way toward a World Beyond Cash™. Mastercard is also a business-to-business firm, providing franchise, technology, and advisory services to commercial, non-profit, and public sector customers that then go on to serve their clients. This approach to the last-mile experience allows for the creation of nuanced, localised solutions targeted at the end user. Mastercard has made a bold commitment to financial inclusion—to reach 500 million people previously excluded from financial services by 2020 including 40 million merchants. In making this promise, Mastercard highlighted the importance of public-private partnerships. While ambitious, this goal is not out of scope of the company’s activities. Mastercard has launched large-scale projects in more than 50 countries, bringing more than 300 million previously excluded consumers and merchants into the formal economy in just the last few years.

    Mastercard has contributed $3.8 million thus far. The are huge advocates of a cashless society, and “financial inclusion”, which would get everyone into the banking system. Also, see a previous article done on Mastercard and financial inclusion.

    ELMA Vaccines Contributions To GAVI

    Beginning its grant-investing activities in 2012, the ELMA Vaccines and Immunization Foundation’s mission is to expand vaccine and immunization coverage for children globally.

    In 2014, ELMA Vaccines and Immunization Foundation pledged USD 2 million to support urgent supply chain needs at country level to overcome barriers to delivering temperature-sensitive vaccines to remote areas. The pledge is matched by the UK Government through Gavi’s Matching Fund, bringing the total sum to USD 4 million.

    In 2018, ELMA partnered with Gavi’s INFUSE Pacesetter, Nexleaf Analytics, to scale up its innovative temperature sensing technology to support the cold chain aiming to increase coverage and vaccine introductions in Tanzania. ELMA pledged USD 1.7 million, which was matched by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation through Gavi’s Matching Fund, bringing the total sum to USD 3.4 million.

    Of course, there are other partners and donors, but that is just a few.

    Organization Or State Amount Donated
    Gates Foundation $4.1B
    Canada $435M
    European Commission $241M
    La Caixa $15.7M
    Audacious Alliance $9M
    Red Nose Da Fund $6.1M
    LDS Charities $4.2M
    Girl Effect $4.0M
    Mastercard $3.8M
    Orange Healthcare $2.7M
    Int’l Fed Pharm Wholesale $1.9M
    ELMA Vaccines $1.7M
    Al Ansari Exchange $1.1M

    Contributions-and-Proceeds-to-Gavi-as-of-30-September-2019

    This is by no means all of GAVI’s contributors. However, it is interesting to note that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is by far the biggest contributor.

    13. WHO And Immunization Agenda 2030

    Immunization is a global health and development success story, saving millions of lives every year. We now have vaccines to prevent more than 20 life-threatening diseases, helping people of all ages live longer, healthier lives. Immunization is the foundation of the primary health care system and an indisputable human right. It’s also one of the best health investments money can buy. Yet despite tremendous progress, far too many people around the world – including nearly 20 million infants each year – have insufficient access to vaccines. In some countries, progress has stalled or even reversed, and there is a real risk that complacency will undermine past achievements.

    With the support of countries and partners, WHO is leading the co-creation of a new global vision and strategy to address these challenges over the next decade, to be endorsed by the World Health Assembly. IA 2030 envisions a world where everyone, everywhere, at every age, fully benefits from vaccines to improve health and well-being.

    IA2030 has been developed through a “bottom-up” co-creation process, with close engagement of countries to ensure that the vision, strategic priorities and goals are aligned with country needs. As an adaptive and flexible strategy, the IA2030 framework is designed to be tailored by countries to their local context, and to be revised throughout the decade as new needs and challenges emerge. IA2030 strategic priorities will be further refined in the monitoring and evaluation framework and will include indicators, targets and methods for tracking progress.

    IA2030 goals are designed to inspire action for implementation. For countries, this could mean setting country-specific targets and milestones for the decade toward those goals. For regions, this could mean contextualising global goals and setting specific targets and milestones in Regional Vaccination Action Plans. For partner organisations, this could mean aligning organizational strategies and indicators to support the attainment of IA2030 goals.

    Yes, immunizing everyone is part of the Agenda 2030. Good to know.

    14. ID2020 And Vaccines

    Hmmm…. looking at those names: who is (was) the head of Microsoft until very recently? Whose foundation is the largest donor to GAVI? The answer to both, of course, is Bill Gates.

    Our Approach to Projects
    The ID2020 Alliance provides funding and other forms of material support for high-impact and high-quality digital identity projects that are privacy-protecting, user-centric, and designed for scale, impact, and replicability. Proposals are accepted on a rolling basis at various stages of development. Any individual or organization meeting the required application and evaluation criteria is welcome to submit a proposal.

    ID2020’s founding partners:

    • Accenture
    • GAVI
    • IDEO
    • Microsoft
    • Rockefeller Foundation

    This is most interesting: a group that wants to advance a digital ID for everyone is largely founded by a man who has an obsession with vaccinating the entire world. If only there was a mutual solution for both problems, such as microchipping everyone.

    15. Gates Foundation Huge Donor For W.H.O.

    Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
    Member profile
    The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (Gates) is a funding organization based in Seattle, Washington USA. Guided by the belief that every life has equal value, this innovative group works to help all people lead healthy, productive lives. In particular, this foundation focuses on improving people’s health and on giving them the chance to lift themselves out of hunger and extreme poverty. The valuable resources shared help empower people for success.
    Main activities

    The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation works with organizations around the world that are using innovative methods to improve healthcare. The main mission is to help ensure that advances in health are created and shared with those who need them most.

    The three priority areas are to:

    • Discover new insights to fight serious diseases and other health problems affecting developing countries.
    • Develop effective and affordable vaccines, medicines, and other health tools.
    • Deliver proven health solutions to those who need them most.

    The foundation’s Global Health Program that accounts for about 50 percent of total spending focuses on 20 diseases. The top five are: diarrheal diseases (including rotavirus), pneumonia, malaria—most deadly to kids—and AIDS and TB, which mostly affect adults.

    Links to the health workforce crisis
    The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation supports advocacy efforts to build awareness of global health challenges, develop new ways to finance health programs, and improve health data. Studies have shown that improved health is critical to getting a country into the positive cycle of increasing education, stability, and wealth. This is accomplished through the right investments in healthcare, training of qualified medical workers and research for science.

    The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation joined the Alliance in 2007 as a development Partner.

    The Gates Foundation has been contributing 50% of the money for 20 diseases. Must given them tremendous influence over how exactly that money is spent.

    16. Gates Is Connected To Everything

    Bill Gates is like the Kevin Bacon of the eugenics movement: he is connected to everything and everyone. Here are some of the relevant links.

    • Bill Gates openly supports reducing the population
    • Bill Gates openly supports vaccines for everyone (except his family)
    • The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation attends UN population conferences
    • The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation finances vaccine research
    • The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is one of the founders of GAVI, the global vaccine alliance
    • World Health Org largely funded by Gates Foundation
    • GAVI is a founding partner of ID2020
    • Microsoft is founding partner of ID2020

    Serious question: did Bill Gates cause this coronavirus “pandemic”? Or is he simply a shameless opportunist looking to cash in on the situation?

    TSCE #7(E): Does Allowing Illegal Aliens Into Canada Violate International Agreements?

    (UN Office on Drugs and Crime)

    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

    (1) https://www.unodc.org/documents/human-trafficking/Migrant-Smuggling/Smuggling_of_Migrants_A_Global_Review.pdf
    (2) https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/organized-crime/intro/UNTOC.html
    (3) http://archive.is/q0XqK
    (4) https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/ProtocolTraffickingInPersons.aspx
    (5) http://archive.is/cjnJt
    (6) https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/OPSCCRC.aspx
    (7) http://archive.is/onmrr
    (8) http://www.ungift.org/
    (9) http://archive.is/Fjuv6
    (10) https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2000/11/20001115%2011-38%20AM/Ch_XVIII_12_ap.pdf
    (11) https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/OPSCCRC.aspx
    (12) http://archive.is/onmrr
    (13) http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/ilc/ilc87/com-chic.htm
    (14) http://archive.is/OZQM
    (15) https://www.icc-cpi.int/nr/rdonlyres/ea9aeff7-5752-4f84-be94-0a655eb30e16/0/rome_statute_english.pdf
    (16) https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/tp/legis-loi.html
    (17) http://archive.is/RQVYA
    (18) https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/may/22/children-abducted-illegals-posing-families-us-bord/

    3. Context For This Piece

    Canada has signed several international treaties, relevant to the prevention of trafficking, smuggling, and other exploitation of people. These agreements include:

    • “Protocol to Prevent. Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons. Especially Women and Children. supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime”, in 2000
    • “Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography”
    • “ILO Convention 182 concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst forms of Child Labor”

    The purpose, as you can imagine, is for governments around the world to cooperate in preventing these activities from happening. Also, it is to punish those responsible when it does happen. Accordingly, they must be taken seriously.

    But what happens when certain governments turn a blind eye to people illegally crossing their borders? What happens when governments enact policies that openly encourage human smuggling and trafficking to occur? Does this not help circumvent the very treaties which are designed to keep vulnerable people safe?

    This is a bit of a rhetorical question, but I believe the answers are “yes”. Should make for interesting discussion, especially if this ever gets advanced in court. As outlined in the last article, the appeal of the Prothonotary’s decision was dismissed. This is unjust, considering how big the issue of illegal crossings into Canada is.

    4. Link Between Illegal Crossings/Trafficking

    More on the research is available in this review. It details the size and scale of smuggling and trafficking, and gives much needed background information on the people who are likely to be involved. The original source is linked here, and well worth a read.

    (There is a connection between smuggling and “irregular migration”)

    (UN abhors smuggling, but fake refugees get a pass)

    2.1 Smuggling of migrants and the concepts of irregular migration and trafficking in persons
    2.1.1 Irregular migration
    The relationship between irregular migration and smuggling of migrants has been discussed in the literature, with most authors acknowledging the crucial role of smuggling of migrants in facilitating irregular migration.

    In looking at the relationship between the two concepts, Friedrich Heckmann stresses that smuggling of migrants plays a crucial role in facilitating irregular migration, as smugglers may provide a wide range of services, from physical transportation and illegal crossing of a border to the procurement of false documents.

    Yes, this has been brought up before, but it is designed to hammer the point home. Smuggling of people across borders is directly connected to the “irregular migration” that occurs at the end. It is the end result of these actions which show no respect for national borders or sovereignty. The UN review is rather blunt on the subject.

    2.2 Conceptualization of smuggling of migrants
    2.2.1 Smuggling as an illegal migration business
    The conceptualization of smuggling as a migration business was formally developed by Salt and Stein in 1997, even if one may find reference to this theory in earlier literature. This new interpretation of the smuggling phenomenon had a great influence on academic circles, and the concept was then borrowed by many academics. In a critical analysis of this concept, Herman stresses that the focus of expert discussions then revolved around the notion of a migration industry and its professionalization, in which migrants are seen as “products” and “people who aid migrants are called ‘smugglers’, and are portrayed as illegal ‘entrepreneurs’”

    Salt and Stein suggested treating international migration as a global business that has both
    legitimate and illegitimate sides
    . The migration business is conceived as a system of institutionalized networks with complex profit and loss accounts, including a set of institutions, agents and individuals each of which stands to make a commercial gain.

    The model conceives trafficking and smuggling as an intermediary part of the global migration business facilitating movement of people between origin and destination countries. The model is divided into three stages: the mobilization and recruitment of migrants; their movement en route; and their insertion and integration into labour markets and host societies in destination countries. Salt and Stein conclude their theory by citing the need to look at immigration controls in a new way, placing sharper focus on the institutions and vested interests involved rather than on the migrants themselves.

    In some sense, this is quite obvious. Of course smuggling and trafficking are businesses, where the commodity being shipped is the people.

    5. Protocol to Prevent, Suppress/Punish Trafficking

    The full name of this treaty is the “Protocol to Prevent. Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons. Especially Women and Children. supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. New York, US November 2000”.

    Canada is a signatory to this treaty, and as such, should be expected to participate in good faith. Here is the preamble to the treaty, followed by a few Articles contained within.

    The States Parlies to this Protocol,
    .
    Declaring that effective action to prevent and combat trafficking in persons, especially women and children, requires a comprehensive international approach in the countries of origin, transit and destination that includes measures to prevent such trafficking, to punish the traffickers and to protect the victims of such trafficking. including by protecting their internationally recognized human rights,
    .
    Taking into account the fact that, despite the existence of a variety of international instruments containing rules and practical measures to combat the exploitation of persons, especially women and children, there is no universal instrument that addresses all aspects of trafficking in persons,
    .
    Concerned that, in the absence of such an instrument, persons who are vulnerable to trafficking will not be sufficiently protected,
    Recalling General Assembly resolution 53/111 of 9 December 1998, in which the Assembly decided to establish an open-ended intergovernmental ad hoc committee for the purpose of elaborating a comprehensive international convention against transnational organized crime and of discussing (he elaboration of, inter alia, an international instrument addressing trafficking in women and children,
    .
    Convinced that supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime with an international instrument for the prevention, suppression and punishment of trafficking in persons, especially women and children, will be useful in preventing and combating that crime.
    Have agreed as follows:

    The goal is pretty straightforward, to create a universal and inclusive agreement on how to combat human trafficking.

    The main difference between smuggling and trafficking is one of consent. Smuggled people are willing accomplices, while trafficked people are essentially prisoners. While this treaty specifically refers to trafficked people, the same measures should be taken considered people who are smuggled.

    First, you can’t usually tell right away if the person is willing or not.

    Second, the nations these people are entering should have some rights.

    Article 2
    Statement of purpose The purposes of this Protocol are:
    (a) To prevent and combat trafficking in persons, paying particular attention to women and children;
    (b) To protect and assist the victims of such trafficking, with full respect for their human rights: and
    (c) To promote cooperation among States Parties in order to meet those objectives.

    Article 11
    Border measures
    I. Without prejudice to international commitments in relation to the free movement of people, States Parties shall strengthen, to the extent possible, such border controls as may be necessary to prevent and detect trafficking in persons.
    2. Each State Party shall adopt legislative or other appropriate measures to prevent, to the extent possible. means of transport operated by commercial carriers from being used in the commission of offences established in accordance with article S of this Protocol.
    3. Where appropriate, and without prejudice to applicable international conventions, such measures shall include establishing the obligation of commercial carriers. including any transportation company or the owner or operator of any means of transport, to ascertain that all passengers are in possession of the travel documents required for entry into the receiving State.
    4. Each State Party shall take the necessary measures, in accordance with its domestic law, to provide for sanctions in cases of violation of the obligation set forth in paragraph 3 of this article.
    5. Each State Party shall consider taking measures that permit, in accordance with its domestic law, the denial of entry or revocation of visas of persons implicated in the commission of offences established in accordance with this Protocol.
    6. Without prejudice to article 27 of the Convention. States Parties shall consider strengthening cooperation among border control agencies by, inter alia. establishing and maintaining direct channels of communication.

    Our current process of letting the RCMP escort people across the border only to release them a few hours later does the public no good at all. Even if people are being willfully smuggled (as opposed to trafficked against their will), we should not be letting such people enter the country on these terms.

    The 2000 agreement Canada signed onto “should” mean something substantive. It shouldn’t allow people to flaunt our laws, with possibly trafficked persons in the group.

    6. Rights Of Child Not To Be Exploited

    This UN Protocol is called the “Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children,
    child prostitution and child pornography”.

    Considering also that the Convention on the Rights of the Child recognizes the right of the child to be protected from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child’s education, or to be harmful to the child’s health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development,
    .
    Gravely concerned at the significant and increasing international traffic in children for the purpose of the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography,
    .
    Deeply concerned at the widespread and continuing practice of sex tourism, to which children are especially vulnerable, as it directly promotes the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography,
    .
    Recognizing that a number of particularly vulnerable groups, including girl children, are at greater risk of sexual exploitation and that girl children are disproportionately represented among the sexually exploited,

    Article 9
    1. States Parties shall adopt or strengthen, implement and disseminate laws, administrative measures, social policies and programmes to prevent the offences referred to in the present Protocol. Particular attention shall be given to protect children who are especially vulnerable to such practices.
    2. States Parties shall promote awareness in the public at large, including children, through information by all appropriate means, education and training, about the preventive measures and harmful effects of the offences referred to in the present Protocol. In fulfilling their obligations under this article, States Parties shall encourage the participation of the community and, in particular, children and child victims, in such information and education and training programmes, including at the international level.
    3. States Parties shall take all feasible measures with the aim of ensuring all appropriate assistance to victims of such offences, including their full social reintegration and their full physical and psychological recovery.
    4. States Parties shall ensure that all child victims of the offences described in the present Protocol have access to adequate procedures to seek, without discrimination, compensation for damages from those legally responsible.
    5. States Parties shall take appropriate measures aimed at effectively prohibiting the production and dissemination of material advertising the offences described in the present Protocol.

    Article 10
    1. States Parties shall take all necessary steps to strengthen international cooperation by multilateral, regional and bilateral arrangements for the prevention, detection, investigation, prosecution and punishment of those responsible for acts involving the sale of children, child prostitution, child pornography and child sex tourism. States Parties shall also promote international cooperation and coordination between their authorities, national and international non-governmental organizations and international organizations.
    2. States Parties shall promote international cooperation to assist child victims in their physical and psychological recovery, social reintegration and repatriation.
    3. States Parties shall promote the strengthening of international cooperation in order to address the root causes, such as poverty and underdevelopment, contributing to the vulnerability of children to the sale of children, child prostitution, child pornography and child sex tourism.
    4. States Parties in a position to do so shall provide financial, technical or other assistance through existing multilateral, regional, bilateral or other programmes.

    This protocol seems reasonable enough. Making sure that children are not being harmed or exploited is a valuable societal function.

    However, when we allow people to enter Canada illegally, and release them into the country soon afterwards, we have no way of knowing what will happen. Our system, which rewards people for deliberately bypassing official border crossings does everyone a disservice.

    No decent person wants children to be exploited, sexually or otherwise. But having laws that make it easy to do so ensures that it will happen at some point.

    7. Eliminating Worst Child Labour

    This international agreement is the “CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION AND IMMEDIATE ACTION FOR THE ELIMINATION OF THE WORST FORMS OF CHILD LABOUR ADOPTED BY THE CONFERENCE AT ITS EIGHTY-SEVENTH SESSION, GENEVA, 17 JUNE 1999”.

    Article 2
    For the purposes of this Convention, the term “child” shall apply to all persons under the age of 18.

    Article 3
    For the purposes of this Convention, the term “the worst forms of child labour” comprises:
    (a) all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict;
    (b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances;
    (c) the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties;
    (d) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.

    Article 4
    1. The types of work referred to under Article 3(d) shall be determined by national laws or regulations or by the competent authority, after consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned, taking into consideration relevant international standards, in particular Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Recommendation, 1999.
    2. The competent authority, after consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned, shall identify where the types of work so determined exist.
    3. The list of the types of work determined under paragraph 1 of this Article shall be periodically examined and revised as necessary, in consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned.

    Article 5
    Each Member shall, after consultation with employers’ and workers’ organizations, establish or designate appropriate mechanisms to monitor the implementation of the provisions giving effect to this Convention.

    Article 6
    1. Each Member shall design and implement programmes of action to eliminate as a priority the worst forms of child labour.
    2. Such programmes of action shall be designed and implemented in consultation with relevant government institutions and employers’ and workers’ organizations, taking into consideration the views of other concerned groups as appropriate.

    All of these articles are completely reasonable, and admirable goals. However, to repeat from earlier, how do we enforce these things we have committed ourselves to doing if we aren’t willing to properly enforce a border? How can we make sure the children (and adults too) are being let in under the pretenses we are told?

    Without taking the time to check thoroughly, how can the RCMP, (and Border Services) ensure that they are not unwitting accomplices to human trafficking or human smuggling?

    8. What If People Aren’t Who They Claim?

    Canada of course has other international obligations. These listed are just 3 of them related to prevent of people being exploited.

    • “Protocol to Prevent. Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons. Especially Women and Children. supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime”, in 2000
    • “Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography”
    • “ILO Convention 182 concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst forms of Child Labor”

    Let’s take a look at what is happening across the U.S./Mexico border: people are abducting children in order to pass as a “family unit” when illegally crossing into the U.S.

    The government warned federal judges in 2016 that their attempts to create a catch-and-release policy for illegal immigrant families would lead to children being “abducted” by migrants hoping to pose as families to take advantage.

    The court brushed aside those worries and imposed catch-and-release anyway.

    Two years later, children are indeed being kidnapped or borrowed by illegal immigrants trying to pose as families, according to Homeland Security numbers, which show the U.S. is on pace for more than 400 such attempts this year. That would be a staggering 900 percent increase over 2017’s total.

    This Washington Times article details how adults wanting to illegally cross into the U.S. are actually abducting children to appear as a “family unit”. That’s right, children are being kidnapped to make it easier for others to stay in the United States illegally. An article in May 2019 suggested that 1/3 of “families” crossing were not blood related at all.

    Sure, the adults use children to cross the border. What happens to them afterwards?

    Is permitting illegal crossings a violation of international agreements? In context, many people who say yes they are.

    9. How Diligent Is IRB/CBSA?

    This evidence transcript is from a Parliamentary meeting on the illegal crossings going on. Let’s look at a few sections of the testimony.

    Spoiler, it’s not very encouraging. 16 month wait times, and it’s based largely on the honour system. Of course, we take people at their word that they, and “their” children, are who they claim to be.

    *****************************************************************

    The response team has both operational and adjudicative thrusts. I’d like to underline that this response has not diminished in any way IRB’s ongoing commitment to one of the key objectives of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which is the security of Canadian society. For example, the IRB has a publicly accessible policy that requires that the RPD not accept a refugee claim until CBSA has had a reasonable opportunity to complete its security screening. This policy remains in place for all claims, including those heard through the response team. There are other processes related to security matters that I would be happy to discuss during the question period, if they are of interest.

    Since July 1, more than 8,000 claims were referred to the RPD. Before this, we were projecting an intake of 40,000 cases for this fiscal year. The strain on the organization to handle this many people’s hearings is enormous, as our capacity to hear cases this fiscal year, following a plan of action for efficiency and internal reallocation of funds, is roughly 2,000 per month, or 24,000 per year.

    Naturally, claimants whose hearings are not brought before a decision-maker of the response team in the next two months will wait to be scheduled like other claimants. Wait times before the Lacolle arrivals were already at approximately 16 months per person. Intake in the eastern region, in the month of September alone, was equal to the eastern region’s intake for all of 2016.

    *****************************************************************

    Mr. Larry Maguire:
    What kind of lag time would we see in that?

    Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
    We have a 16-month wait time for our regular stream. But are you asking me about when the basis of claim form will be expected?
    That practice notice is just a temporary practice notice. We’re going to wait to see probably until the end of November before we reconsider whether or not we suspend that practice notice in which case it would go back to 15 days.

    Mr. Larry Maguire:
    How do you keep track of those people in the meantime? Where are they?

    Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
    If you go to our website, it says that you need to submit all the information around tombstone data, like address, and you have to keep us apprised of your changes of address and contact information. If you have counsel or if you have a consultant who is working with you, we need their contact information as well.
    We are in contact with them about the scheduling and their claim processing.

    Mr. Larry Maguire:
    Are either of you aware of any process that CBSA or others would use to make sure they know where all the illegal immigrants that come across are in Canada at all times?

    Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
    Do you mean by that, people who have crossed the border irregularly?

    Mr. Larry Maguire:
    Yes.

    Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
    You have to ask CBSA but we all keep track of the claimants relative to the information they’ve given us. They are responsible for keeping all of us up to date on their changes of address and where they are in the country, which is how my colleague was able to describe where the secondary migration to other cities has happened.

    Mr. Larry Maguire:
    When you say “they”, is that information that immigration or CBSA has given you, or is it the individuals themselves?

    Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
    The claimants are responsible for maintaining their files up to date. Like any court procedure, you would always be responsible to that tribunal for your information. These are very official processes with the claimants.

    Mr. Larry Maguire:
    You were saying there were 8,000 crossings since September 1, or was it July 1?

    Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
    That’s the number that had been referred to us since July 1, and we don’t keep the statistics about the number of people crossing. We only become seized with the matter when the referral has been by CBSA or IRCC. Our data are always about our caseload, not about the number of people who have interfaced with IRCC or CBSA.

    *****************************************************************

    Our political leaders at work….

    UN’s Neverending Quest To Ban Criticism Of Islam

    (Quick search of UN index on “Islamophobia” gets 586 hits.)

    (The UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief)

    (2004 UN Secretary General’s speech on Islamophobia)

    (2005 Resolution on religious defamation)

    (2010 Organization Of The Islamic Conference. Promotes “hijra”, conquest by immigration, and complains about predictable backlash against Muslims who won’t assimilate.)

    (2012 Turkey speaks at UN General Assembly. Calls for UN to establish legal framework against religious defamation.)

    (2014 Committee on International Terrorism)

    (2015 Must stem bigotry, Islamophobia)

    1. Important Links

    CLICK HERE, for Proposed Global Ban On Islamophobia.
    CLICK HERE, to search UN database on Islamophobia.

    Religious Defamation/Islamophobia
    CLICK HERE, for Confronting Islamophobia, Dec 2004.
    CLICK HERE, for UN Res 7/19, Relig. Defamation, Mar 2008.
    CLICK HERE, for free speech ==> intolerance, April 2009.
    CLICK HERE, for UN on religious tolerance, Oct 2009.
    CLICK HERE, for World Interfaith Harmony Week, Feb 2010.
    CLICK HERE, for OIC calls For minority rights, Sept 2010.
    CLICK HERE, for Afghan mission, religious defamation leads to violence, Afghanistan, Sept 2012.
    CLICK HERE, UNGA: Islamophobia rampant, Sept 2012.
    CLICK HERE, for wars caused by Islamophobia, Sept 2014.
    CLICK HERE, for Islamophobia conflates terrorism, Islam.
    CLICK HERE, for Islamophobia, intolerance rising, April 2015.
    CLICK HERE, for Islamophobia Is Violence, June 2015.
    CLICK HERE, for wrong To equate violence/Islam, Sept 2015.
    CLICK HERE, for violence caused By bigotry, Oct 2015.
    CLICK HERE, for Islamophobia poisoning society, Aug 2017.

    CLICK HERE, for Iqra Khalid’s Islamophobia motion, M-103.

    Internet Regulation/Censorship
    CLICK HERE, for digital cooperation.
    CLICK HERE, for Richard Lee on UN regulating the internet.
    CLICK HERE, for proposed digital charter.

    2. Context For This Piece

    The topic of the UN wanting a global ban on criticising Islam has been addressed on this site before. However, after some reflection and a follow-up, there wasn’t nearly enough detail in that last piece.

    While the UN search alone uncovered 586 articles, resolutions, drafts, or other documents under the search term “ISLAMOPHOBIA”, we will not be looking at them all.

    Instead, several more will be added. Hopefully the bigger picture will become clear.

    3. UN Secretary General’s Speech, Dec 2004

    When a new word enters the language, it is often the result of a scientific advance or a diverting fad. But when the world is compelled to coin a new term to take account of increasingly widespread bigotry, that is a sad and troubling development. Such is the case with Islamophobia.

    The word seems to have emerged in the late 1980s and early 1990s. But the phenomenon dates back centuries. Today, the weight of history and the fallout of recent developments have left many Muslims around the world feeling aggrieved and misunderstood, concerned about the erosion of their rights and even fearing for their physical safety. So the title of this series is very appropriate: there is much to unlearn.

    Islam’s tenets are frequently distorted and taken out of context, with particular acts or practices being taken to represent or to symbolize a rich and complex faith. Some claim that Islam is incompatible with democracy, or irrevocably hostile to modernity and the rights of women. And in too many circles, disparaging remarks about Muslims are allowed to pass without censure, with the result that prejudice acquires a veneer of acceptability.

    Stereotypes also depict Muslims as opposed to the West, despite a history not only of conflict but also of commerce and cooperation, and of influencing and enriching each other’s art and science. European civilization would not have advanced to the extent it did had Christian scholars not benefited from the learning and literature of Islam in the Middle Ages, and later.

    Some points in the address to mention:

    (a) European would not have advanced to the extent that it did without learning and literature of Islam? Okay, what exactly did it contribute?

    (b) Disparaging remarks are allowed to pass without censure? Is this a warning that censorship is coming?

    (c) The physical safety of Muslims? What about the physical safety of other people at the hands of Muslims?

    4. UN Res 719, Religious Defamation, Oct 2005

    2. Also expresses deep concern at attempts to identify Islam with terrorism, violence and human rights violations and emphasizes that equating any religion with terrorism should be rejected and combated by all at all levels;

    3. Further expresses deep concern at the intensification of the campaign of defamation of religions and the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities in the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001;

    6. Expresses concern at laws or administrative measures that have been specifically designed to control and monitor Muslim minorities, thereby stigmatizing them and legitimizing the discrimination that they experience;

    9. Also urges States to provide, within their respective legal and constitutional systems, adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from the defamation of any religion, to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and their value systems and to complement legal systems with intellectual and moral strategies to combat religious hatred and intolerance;

    14. Deplores the use of printed, audio-visual and electronic media, including the Internet, and of any other means to incite acts of violence, xenophobia or related intolerance and discrimination towards Islam or any religion;

    15. Invites the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance to continue to report on all manifestations of defamation of religions, and in particular on the serious implications of Islamophobia, on the enjoyment of all rights to the Council at its ninth session;

    Sound familiar? This “non-binding” resolution passed in 2005, and contains much of the same language that is in Iqra Khalid’s blasphemy motion, M-103. The goal to ban criticism of Islam is a very long running one.

    Almost as if there were legitimate issues they wanted to suppress.

    5. UN Press Briefing, April 2009

    Asked for her views on the remarks made yesterday by the President of Iran through which he linked Zionism to racism, she said it was regrettable and said she aligned herself to the sentiments purporting that this was a disservice to the people of Iran, a country of cultural values. She said it was regretful the Conference started off of the wrong footing but said she was hopeful it would get back on track.   Personally, she said she firmly believed in freedom of expression regardless of how obnoxious it may be.  Whether it was intolerant or not, depended on who said it.  Statements from people in public positions which were intolerant should be frowned upon

    Responding to a question on defamation of religion, she said in the context of international law there was no such thing as defamation of religion; however, there was incitement on the basis of religion.  If one took the notion of defamation of religion that meant all debates on religions had to be asphyxiated. The notion of the defamation of religion was not only detrimental to the mandate of freedom of religion but also to the whole concept of human rights. 

    A few interesting points in the briefing. We don’t refer to it as defamation of religious, but there is incitement of religion. Not sure there is much of a difference as far as Islam is concerned. Also, it was nice to point out that intolerant is really a point of view.

    6. Rapporteur On Freedom Of Religion Or Belief, Oct 2009

    Governments have a central role to play in either preventing or contributing to religious friction, an independent United Nations expert said today, noting that a State’s commitments to non-discrimination, as well as its policies and messages, can promote tolerance.

    Asma Jahangir, the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, told a news conference in New York that there are preventive measures governments can take to avoid further polarization on the basis of religion before it erupts into violence.

    She also noted that while governments are talking about issues such as defamation of religion, there is “less addressing of the issue of religious incitement to violence, discrimination and hatred.”

    This should really be a warning sign. Legitimate concern and criticism of religion can become grounds committing violence on the basis of “incitement to violence”. It’s interesting how the conversation shifts from DEFAMATION towards INCITEMENT, as if it were to provide a stronger justification for committing violence.

    7. Org. Of Islamic Conference, Sept 2010

    I would, in this presentation, essentially approach this multifaceted issue in the light of my experience and role as the Secretary General of the OIC-which with its 57 member states has, over the last four decades, evolved as the second largest International Organization after the UN. We are currently in the process of implementing a Ten Year Programme of Action. Propelled by the vision of ‘moderation and modernization, the Programme has identified priority areas of action. It accords primacy to multilateralism, human rights and cultural diplomacy as key items on the OIC agenda. Each of these issues is relevant to our discussion today. I would, therefore, be sharing a few thoughts in both the spirit and interest of a lively debate that-I am confident -would follow in this prestigious setting.

    He then goes on to talk about how many parts of Europe and Eurasia either are majority Muslim, or have large Muslim populations.

    The term is “hijra”, which is conquest by immigration. Large parts of those areas have been conquered over time and are now subject to Islamic law. He now gets into the very predictable politics of grievances.

    Unfortunately, the Muslims of Europe and other parts of the Western world have become suspect because of a campaign launched by a number of motivated individuals and groups who appear to bear an incomprehensible grudge against Muslims and Islam. The Muslim population of Europe that has for centuries lived in peace and harmony with other communities, are today being regarded as aliens. They are under some pressure to give up some of their cultural traits and practices on the ground that these are not compatible with local customs and practices. This has resulted in a growing divide.

    The current tension in relations between Islam and the West is pregnant with risk of transforming the notion of clash of civilizations a self-fulfilling prophecy. Islamophobia and discrimination against Muslims in the West appears to emanate from different physical appearance of Muslims and also in intolerance toward their religion and cultural beliefs.

    I don’t see, particularly with the aforementioned historical background, as to why migration of Muslims to Europe and elsewhere in the West should be seen and portrayed as a threat today. Why should they be construed as aliens? Why must the symbols of their identity be denigrated? Why should the expressions of their identity be banned? It is indeed an unfortunate situation that challenges the identity of Muslim migrants. It also defies the salient features of European identity including tolerance, non discrimination and respect for human rights. Most importantly, it poses a clear and present danger to peace, security and stability in the regional as well as the global context.

    Of course, what is intentionally left out of this is that the vast majority of Muslims have no intention of ever assimilating. Islam is an ideology that is build on achieving dominance through deceit, political methods, and outright violence.

    The taqiyya is strong with this group.

    The part about the IOC being 57 members is true though. As such, it wields tremendous influence over the UN and its agenda.

    8. UN Afghan Ass’t Mission, Sept 2012

    Kabul, 13 September – The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) deplores the disrespectful, insulting and inflammatory material posted on the internet that seeks to denigrate the religious beliefs of Muslims and to incite violence and hate.

    The United Nations rejects this despicable action and defamation of religion in all forms. Such intentional acts insulting the religious beliefs of others are unacceptable.

    The United Nations itself is the symbol of religious tolerance and inclusive diversity representing as it does all the peoples of the world. We hold Islam and Muslims in the whole world in high esteem.

    While the United Nations in Afghanistan joins the people and government of Afghanistan in strongly condemning this abhorrent action, nothing can justify violence or the further loss of life. Following the statement of the UN Secretary General of yesterday, UNAMA calls on all Afghans to exercise restraint in their indignation and to reject calls to violence or vicious behaviour.

    The United Nations will continue to help the Afghan people lay the foundations for stability, security and lasting peace in Afghanistan.

    While the Mission bent over backwards to kick ass and apologize for Islam, it was nice to at least hear that this violence is not justified. A good start.

    9. Turkey At UNGA, Sept 2012

    He underlined that the recent attacks against the Prophet Muhammad and against Islam were outright provocations that aimed to pit nations and peoples against each other. Turkey condemned all sorts of incitement to hatred and religious discrimination against Muslims and peoples of other faiths. Unfortunately, Islamophobia had become a new form of racism, like anti-Semitism, and it could no longer be tolerated “under the guise of freedom of expression”. Freedom did not mean anarchy, he stressed in that respect; instead, it meant responsibility. At the same time, he condemned the provocation and violence that followed, saying it “cannot be justified under any pretext”. Because of the alarming increase in the number of acts that defame religions, he believed the time had come to establish the denigration of all religions and their followers as a hate crime. He called for a universal policy and legal instrument that, while protecting free expression, should also ensure respect for religion and prevent intentional insults against faiths. “The solution should not be arbitrary,” he added, calling on the United Nations, in particular, to lead that effort and provide the international legal framework.

    Turkey wants the UN to establish an international legal framework? As in what, a global ban on blasphemy? Perhaps it will shut down any speech remotely offensive to anyone.

    Let’s be honest though. The real goal is preventing criticism of Islam. After all, you can criticize a political ideology freely, but a religious group is off limits.

    10. Comm. On Int’l Terrorism, Oct 2014

    AMR EL-HAMAMY (Egypt), speaking for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), denounced atrocities committed by terrorists around the world and stressed that they contradicted the practices and principles of Islam. No religion or religious doctrine encouraged or inspired acts of terrorism, and therefore, none should be portrayed as such. He strongly condemned some politicians’ attempts to link Islam with terrorism, noting that such attempts played in the hands of terrorists and constituted an advocacy of religious hatred, discrimination and hostility against Muslims.

    Reaffirming the OIC’s commitment to strengthening mutual cooperation, he said that only a coordinated approach by the international community would yield effective results. Further, a comprehensive strategy must address the root causes of terrorism, such as the unlawful use of force, aggression and political and economic injustice, among others.

    He reiterated the need to distinguish between terrorism and the exercise of the legitimate right of peoples to resist foreign occupation, noting that such distinction was duly observed in international law and international humanitarian law. He also called for cooperation in banning the payment of ransoms to terrorist groups. Underscoring the need to make progress on the draft comprehensive convention, he emphasized his determination to resolve outstanding issues, including those related to the legal definition of terrorism and voiced support for the convening of a high-level conference under the auspices of the United Nations.

    It is much the same story here: Muslims and Islam are being discriminated against. However, the topic of resisting occupations is brought up. Of course, depending on what one views as an occupation, almost any violence “could” be justified on those grounds.

    11. Must Stem Intolerance, Bigotry, April 2015

    However, with “troubling frequency” violent attacks and despicable crimes are being carried out and claiming the lives of innocent men, women and children. From Paris to Tunis, and from Garissa to Yarmouk and Johannesburg to Peshawar, “no person, society of nation is immune” from intolerance or the threat of violent extremism, he added. In places like Iraq Afghanistan and Mali, irreplaceable artefacts are being destroyed.

    “There is no justification for such attacks. We must condemn all manifestations of intolerance, including anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and racism,” and all other forms of prejudice, harassment or violence, the General Assembly President said.

    As such stories become all too common the world must stand up toward the threat of intolerance and radicalism. “Violent extremism is a global test and our response must solve the problem,” Mr. Ban said.

    D’aesh, Al Shabaab and Boko Haram are part of a new generation of terrorist groups threatening international peace and security but the problem goes beyond them and the regions in which they operate. Racism, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia exists worldwide and to protect the innocent “we must safeguard our moral compass,” he said.

    This leaves out the inconvenient fact that most terrorism in the world is committed by Muslims, in the name of Islam. But why should that detail get in the way?

    12. Remember Digital Cooperation?

    Digital Cooperation was earlier discussed on this site as well. Despite the harmless and well sounding verbiage, it is internet censorship, with the UN at the helm. A recent invention was the proposed Digital Charter, which was along the same lines.

    One other note to mention: in a 2019 by-election debate Liberal Candidate Richard Lee proposed having the UN create a body to oversee and regulate the internet.

    Internet regulation and banning criticism of Islam go hand and hand. In today’s world, the latter cannot be achieved without the former.

    13. UN Global Migration Compact

    OBJECTIVE 17: Eliminate all forms of discrimination and promote evidence-based public discourse to shape perceptions of migration
    33. We commit to eliminate all forms of discrimination, condemn and counter expressions, acts and manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, violence, xenophobia and related intolerance against all migrants in conformity with international human rights law. We further commit to promote an open and evidence-based public discourse on migration and migrants in partnership with all parts of society, that generates a more realistic, humane and constructive perception in this regard. We also commit to protect freedom of expression in accordance with international law, recognizing that an open and free debate contributes to a comprehensive understanding of all aspects of migration.

    c) Promote independent, objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet-based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media.

    Remember this gem? If you wanted to shut down criticism of an ideology, just call it bigotry or Islamophobia and the problem is solved.

    14. This Is Just A Small Sample

    As stated at the beginning, a quick search of “Islamophobia” in the UN records will net 586 hits. This is not just a one off. A quick search through them comes up with much the same pattern: blame everything on Islamophobia and intolerance, then demand actions be taken.

    It’s actually an eerily well organized scam. Once you are not allowed to criticize a group, then they have already won.

    Let’s be clear what is going on: these efforts are done in the name of censoring and shutting down legitimate criticism and concern of Islam. Few could publicly justify shutting down POLITICAL ideologies without backlash. However, if those goals were framed as RELIGIOUS in nature, then they would be relatively safe.