Category: Vaccines

Posted on

Various Bonds, Enterprises, The World Bank Group Is Running

The World Bank tries to portray itself as an organization devoted to the welfare of humankind globally. However, the organization is involved in many bond schemes that most people are completely unaware of. It’s quite the lucrative side operation.

  • IBRD, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
  • IDA, The International Development Association
  • IFC, The International Finance Corporation
  • MIGA, The Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency
  • ICSID, The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Dispute

Partnering With Governments
Together, IBRD and IDA form the World Bank, which provides financing, policy advice, and technical assistance to governments of developing countries. IDA focuses on the world’s poorest countries, while IBRD assists middle-income and creditworthy poorer countries.
.
Partnering With The Private Sector
IFC, MIGA, and ICSID focus on strengthening the private sector in developing countries. Through these institutions, the World Bank Group provides financing, technical assistance, political risk insurance, and settlement of disputes to private enterprises, including financial institutions.
.
One World Bank Group
While our five institutions have their own country membership, governing boards, and articles of agreement, we work as one to serve our partner countries. Today’s development challenges can only be met if the private sector is part of the solution. But the public sector sets the groundwork to enable private investment and allow it to thrive. The complementary roles of our institutions give the World Bank Group a unique ability to connect global financial resources, knowledge, and innovative solutions to the needs of developing countries.

Most people don’t know this, but the World Bank is actually the partnership of 5 organizations. Strangely, an outside search of them reveals nothing about them, other than being part of the World Bank Group. A deep dive is needed into the inner workings of the World Bank, and is coming in a future article.

1. Types Of Bonds World Bank Involved With

Here are some of the programs the World Bank has been mixed up in. It’s quite the varied and lucrative enterprise. People can become very wealthy with these schemes, although, it’s dependent on others playing along.

  • Blockchain Bonds
  • Blue (Water) Bonds
  • Green Bonds
  • Pandemic Bonds
  • Social Bonds
  • Vaccine Bonds

2. World Bank & Blockchain Bonds

WASHINGTON/SYDNEY, August 23/24, 2018 – The World Bank launched bond-i (blockchain operated new debt instrument), the world’s first bond to be created, allocated, transferred and managed through its life cycle using distributed ledger technology. The two-year bond raised $110 million, marking the first time that investors have supported the World Bank’s development activities in a transaction that is fully managed using the blockchain technology.

The World Bank mandated Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) as arranger for the bond on August 10. The announcement was followed by a two-week consultation period with the market, with key investors indicating strong support for the issuance.

Investors in the bond include CBA, First State Super, NSW Treasury Corporation, Northern Trust, QBE, SAFA, and Treasury Corporation of Victoria. CBA and the World Bank will continue to welcome investor interest in the bond throughout its life cycle, and inquiries from other market participants in relation to the platform.

The bond is part of a broader strategic focus of the World Bank to harness the potential of disruptive technologies for development. In June 2017, the World Bank launched a Blockchain Innovation Lab to understand the impact of blockchain and other disruptive technologies in areas such as land administration, supply chain management, health, education, cross-border payments, and carbon market trading.

The World Bank Group started “blockchain bonds” in 2018. Rather than the more traditional methods, this would, as the name implies, use Blockchain technology as an alternative. The next round of bonds came in 2019.

3. World Bank & Blue (Water) Bonds

The Republic of Seychelles start the first sovereign “blue bond” in 2018. The Rockefeller Foundation, Standard Chartered Bank and Bank of New York Mellon helped with payments. The bonds themselves were placed with the private investors: Nuveen, Prudential and Calvert Impact Capital.

4. World Bank & Green/Climate Bonds

Climate Bonds, or “Green Bonds“, is yet another growing industry that the Rockefellers and other environmental groups are trying to pump up. This is an industry that is potentially worth $100 trillion or more. However, the money likely won’t be going where people think it will.

5. World Bank, PEFF & Pandemic Bonds

Washington, DC, June 28, 2017 – The World Bank (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development) today launched specialized bonds aimed at providing financial support to the Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility (PEF), a facility created by the World Bank to channel surge funding to developing countries facing the risk of a pandemic.

This marks the first time that World Bank bonds are being used to finance efforts against infectious diseases, and the first time that pandemic risk in low-income countries is being transferred to the financial markets.

The PEF will provide more than $500 million to cover developing countries against the risk of pandemic outbreaks over the next five years, through a combination of bonds and derivatives priced today, a cash window, and future commitments from donor countries for additional coverage.

The transaction, that enables PEF to potentially save millions of lives, was oversubscribed by 200% reflecting an overwhelmingly positive reception from investors and a high level of confidence in the new World Bank sponsored instrument. With such strong demand, the World Bank was able to price the transaction well below the original guidance from the market. The total amount of risk transferred to the market through the bonds and derivatives is $425 million.

In June 2017, the World Bank started up “Pandemic Bonds“, which would be a sort of insurance policy against infectious diseases. Of course, one has to wonder how far ahead they saw in starting this.

The PEFF, or Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility, will determine if there is a pandemic, according to certain criteria. But early in 2020, the World Bank was accused of “waiting for people to die”, by refusing to pay out this money.

6. World Bank & Social Impact Bonds

In February 2019 “Social Impact Bonds” were started up. They are marketed as a sort of social investment driver, to improve the quality of live for people in the 3rd World, particularly women. They are also supposed to help with the financing of the UNSDA, or United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda.

7. World Bank, IFFM & Vaccine Bonds

This was addressed in the Planned-emic series. Instead of giving money directly to GAVI, there is a convoluted scheme that involves making pledges to IFFIm, the International Finance Facility for Immunizations. Those pledges are then used to generate bonds which are sold to the World Bank. The World Bank then re-sells those bonds on the open market. The money from sales goes to GAVI, who uses it to finance their vaccine agenda.

Note: IFFIm is actually financed by GAVI (who is financed by Gates), so there isn’t really any independence here.

Of course, these means that donor pledges end up costing much more than originally told, or it means only a portion of that money is put to use.

8. Some Thoughts On These Bonds

In early 2020, the President of Belarus claimed that the IMF (International Monetary Fund), and World Bank, offered him a bribe of almost $1 billion if he would impose pandemic measures on his country. He refused. While that seemed like an absurd conspiracy theory at the time, more and more questions need to be answered.

What are the IMF and World Bank up to, and are these bonds connected to their push for drastic (and forced) social changes?

While all of these projects have nice enough sounding names, a question keeps coming up: why is it necessary to use these bonds at all? Instead of selling, and reselling bonds, shouldn’t the money go directly to the people who will be impacted? After all, the average person doesn’t benefit from increased bond values, only the bond holders do.

It’s interesting that the Rockefeller Foundation is so supportive of all of this. After all, they drafted the Lockstep Narrative in 2010. They lay out in broad strokes how to force social change under the false pretense of a global health crisis.

Of course, companies that don’t play along with the agenda, such as “non-green” industries, will soon be forced out of business. The threats have been openly made for a long time now.

(1) 5 Organizations Make Up The World Bank
(2) World Bank Launches “Blockchain Bond” In 2018
(3) Second Round Of Blockchain Bonds In 2019
(4) Video Explaining Blockchain Implementation In New Bonds
(5) Seychelles Launches Blue Bonds In 2018
(6) Blue Bonds Partially Financed By Rockefeller Foundation
(7) Video Explaining Blue (Water) Bonds Concept
(8) Rockefeller Foundation Financing Green Bonds
(9) Founders And Partners Of Climate Bonds
(10) “Pandemic Bonds” Started in 2017 By World Bank Group
(11) Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility
(12) World Bank Won’t Pay Out Pandemic Bonds
(13) Video Explaining Pandemic Bonds Concept
(14) World Bank Launching Social Impact Bonds
(15) Lukashenko Claims IMF & World Bank Offered Bribe

Posted on

Conservatives Whine About Sexual Assault During Quarantine, Not The Forced Quarantines Themselves

This is a new level of moral relativity. Apparently, authorities detaining people for 14 days under the false pretense of public safety is okay. The forcible confinement is not the issue. Nor is the nasal rape that comes in the form of PCR tests. However, the entire experience is suddenly a human rights violation if a sexual assault is committed during that time.

1. Rempel Supports House Arrest In Principle

https://twitter.com/GregMcLeanYYC/status/1358115105683066881

This is from February 6, 2021. At the 28 second mark, Michelle Rempel-Garner explicitly states that everyone (presuming her party included), supports the idea of forcing people into their homes for 14 days at a time.

In her usual “Canada last” ways, she does ask for exemptions for Temporary Foreign Workers from quarantine, at a time when unemployment in Canada is still extremely high.

To reiterate, the “Official Opposition” doesn’t have a problem with imprisoning people. Their complaints are limited to some of the details of implementing such policies.

2. Fake Outrage Over Assault In Quarantine

https://twitter.com/MichelleRempel/status/1365032919866118147

On February 25, Rempel pretended to be outraged that people coming into Canada were being forced into quarantine against their will, and not knowing where they are going. Keep in mind, on February 6, she was okay with this, according to her own statement.

Does any of this mean that Conservatives now have a problem with this sort of confinement? Keep in mind, it would be illegal in any other circumstances. No. Instead, all that is asked is for a review, and to do a better job of vetting the guards holding them prisoner.

“The Liberal government must take action now. We call for the Liberals to suspend the hotel quarantine requirement until they have put measures in place to ensure the safety of Canadians and institute a system for verifying at-home quarantine that doesn’t involve security agents who have not been properly vetted. During this necessary pause, the federal government should continue with on-arrival testing and the 14-day at-home quarantine for all international travelers to protect the public health of Canadians.”

Even in her statement, there is no principled objection to the quarantine camps themselves (or internment camps). There is no objection to forcing people into house arrest. In fact, they seem content to re-establish these detention centers once better screening methods are in place.

The National Post mentioned that there was a call to suspend the program, which is not the same thing as cancelling it altogether.

3. Vaccine Agenda: They’re All In It Together

(See 1:30 mark in this, or original video). Trudeau claims that “normalcy will not return without a vaccine that is widely available, and that could be a very long way off”.

https://twitter.com/erinotoole/status/1356966419934683138

This is Erin O’Toole, the leader of the so-called “Conservative” Party of Canada, which claims to be the main opposition to Trudeau. Problem is: they don’t actually oppose anything ideologically. They whine about vaccines and tests not arriving fast enough, but don’t object on moral or ethical grounds.

There’s no way to describe this other than as a dog and pony show. These “leaders” are just going through the motions.

Posted on

Active Federal Pharma Lobbying Registrations, Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

According to the Federal Lobbying Registry, there are 69 ACTIVE registrations that are flagged under the search word of “vaccine”. This includes multiple registrations from the same company, and a few irrelevant hits. Lobbyists aren’t cheap, and there is considerable money tied up in all of this.

Also, what exactly is going on with that proposed vaccine injury compensation program?

1. No Details In Vaccine Injury Program

News release
December 10, 2020 – Ottawa, ON – Public Health Agency of Canada
.
We as Canadians pride ourselves on our commitment to each other. By getting vaccinated, we protect one another and our way of life. Vaccines are safe, effective and one of the best ways to prevent serious illness like COVID-19.

Vaccines are only approved in Canada after thorough and independent review of the scientific evidence. They are also closely monitored once on the market and can quickly be removed from market if safety concerns are identified. Notwithstanding the rigour of clinical trials and excellence in vaccine delivery, a small number of Canadians may experience an adverse event following immunization, caused by vaccines or their administration.

Like any medication, vaccines can cause side effects and reactions. After being vaccinated, it’s common to have mild and harmless side effects — this is the body’s natural response, as it’s working to build immunity against a disease. However, it is also possible for someone to have a serious adverse reaction to a vaccine. The chances of this are extremely rare — less than one in a million — and we have a duty to help if this occurs.

It is for this reason that the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) is implementing a pan-Canadian no-fault vaccine injury support program for all Health Canada approved vaccines, in collaboration with provinces and territories. Building on the model in place in Québec for over 30 years, the program will ensure that all Canadians have to have fair access to support in the rare event that they experience an adverse reaction to a vaccine. This program will also bring Canada in line with its G7 counterparts with similar programs, and ensure the country remains competitive in accessing new vaccines as they become available.

Quick facts
Serious adverse reactions to vaccines are extremely rare. They happen less than one time in a million.

It was announced on December 10, 2020, that a vaccine injury program would be launched in cooperation with the Provinces. That was 2 1/2 months ago, and no details have emerged. Considering that mass vaccination is going on NOW, this is pretty urgent.

In “collaboration with the Provinces” implies that they will have to go along with it as well. If history is any indictation, Federal-Provincial talks go very slowly.

While it’s claimed that vaccines undergo serious testing PRIOR to their approval, that isn’t really the case. Details will be provided in the next section.

2. Vaccines Approved While Still In Testing

Interim orders
.
30.1 (1) The Minister may make an interim order that contains any provision that may be contained in a regulation made under this Act if the Minister believes that immediate action is required to deal with a significant risk, direct or indirect, to health, safety or the environment.

People naturally assume that a medical product (such as a vaccine), is thoroughly tested prior to being approved. Actually, the Section 30.1 of the Food & Drug Act allows the Health Minister to sign an Interim Order and approve almost anything. And yes, such an Order was signed by Patty Hajdu.

3. Active Lobbying Registrations On “Vaccines”

COMPANY LOBBYIST/POSITION/FIRM
AstraZeneca Canada Inc. Jane Chung, President
Bayer, Inc. *Sheamus Murphy, Counsel Public Affairs Inc.
Bayer, Inc. *David Murray, Counsel Public Affairs Inc.
Best Medicines Coalition *William Dempster, 3Sixty Public Affairs Inc.
Best Medicines Coalition Paulette Eddy, Consultant
Best Medicines Coalition Jay Strauss, Consultant
Biotecanada Andrew Casey, President & CEO
Canadian Animal Health Institute Kevin Bosch, Hill+Knowlton Strategies
Canadian Medical Association E. Ann Collins
Canadian Medical Association Timothy Smith, Chief Executive Officer
Canadian Pharmacists Association Annette Robinson, Director
Canadian Pharmacists Association Glen Doucet, Chief Executive Officer
Entos Pharmaceuticals Farid, Faroud, Global Public Affairs Inc.
Entos Pharmaceuticals Conor Mahoney, Global Public Affairs Inc.
Entos Pharmaceuticals *Andrew Retfalvi, Global Public Affairs Inc.
Entos Pharmaceuticals Jay Strauss, Consultant
Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance Ashton Arsenault, Crestview Strategy
Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance Jason Clark, Crestview Strategy
GlaxoSmithKline Faris El-Refaie, President
GlaxoSmithKline Inc. *Bridget Howe, Counsel Public Affairs Inc.
GlaxoSmithKline Inc. *Sheamus Murphy, Counsel Public Affairs Inc.
GlaxoSmithKline Inc. *Ben Parsons, Counsel Public Affairs Inc.
GlaxoSmithKline Inc. *Amber Ruddy, Counsel Public Affairs Inc.
Immune Biosolutions Frédéric Leduc, Président
Innovative Medicines Canada Andrew Balfour, Rubicon Strategy Inc.
Innovative Medicines Canada Pamela Fralick, President
Intervac Int’l Vaccine Centre *Douglas Richardson, McKercher LLP
Janssen Inc. (Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson Jorge Bartolome, President
Malaika Vaccine idee Inyangudor, Wellington Advocacy
Medicago Inc. Ashton Arsenault, Crestview Strategy
Medicago Inc. Jason Clark, Crestview Strategy
Medicago Inc. Danielle Peters, Magnet Strategy Group
Medicago Inc. Patricia Sibal, Crestview Strategy
Merck Canada Inc. Anna Van Acker, President
Moderna Therapeutics Paul Monlezun, Public Affairs Advisors
National Ethnic Press and Media Council of Canada David Valentin, Liaison Strategies
Particle Vaccine Canada Ltd. *Dylan McGuinty, Director
*Pfizer Canada ULC Cole C. Pinnow, President
PlantEXT Inc. *Andre Albinati, Earnscliffe Strategy Group
PlantEXT Inc. *Charles Bird, Earnscliffe Strategy Group
PlantEXT Inc. Craig Robinson, Earnscliffe Strategy Group
Sanofi Pasteur Limited Fabien Marino, Vice President
Sanofi Pasteur Limited *David Angus, Capital Hill Group
University of Saskatchewan *Douglas Richardson, McKercher LLP
*University of Saskatchewan Peter Stoicheff, President and Vice-Chancellor
Variation Biotechnologies, Inc. Francisco Diaz-Mitoma, Consultant
Vaxil Biotherapeutics Lester Scheininger, Barrister and Solicitor
Zebra Technologies *Adria Minsky, Cumberland Strategies
Zebra Technologies Alec Newton, Cumberland Strategies
  • means person has held public office, or organization has former public office holders currently on staff.

4. GSK Lobbyists Worked In Public Offices

The 4 lobbyists registered to advocate on behalf of GSK, (GlaxoSmithKline), have all held public office in some capacity. But don’t worry, they are probably neutral actors here, and nothing improper will happen.

5. Other Lobbyists Worked In Public Offices

Of course, Crestview Strategy, Ashton Arsenault, Zakery Blais & Jason Clark have all been addressed in previous pieces. Please check them out for more information.

This might also be a good time to bring up the people that have Doug Ford’s attention, Bill 160, Alberta and Quebec lobbying as well.

Posted on

DisinfoWatch: Ties To Atlas Network, Connected To LPC Political Operatives

Another website is out, this one called DisinfoWatch. It’s a rather ironic name, considering who funds it, and that its agenda is to parrot the Government narrative,

1. DisinfoWatch Is Brand New Group

MONITOR
We identify and track mis/disinformation narratives and trends emerging from both domestic and foreign sources, through a global network of partners
.
RESEARCH
When we detect potential Covid related mis/disinformation we analyze content, its sources and seek to debunk wherever possible. Examples are then added to our database
.
LITERACY
Promoting digital literacy with the latest learning resources to foster greater awareness of mis/disinformation and promote skills such as source, claim and fact checking.
.
DEFEND
By exposing and debunking mis/disinformation on an ongoing basis and producing regular DisinfoDigests, DisinoWatch builds resilience against it – regardless of source or intent.

DisinfoWatch’s Twitter account started in September 2020. At the time of writing this, there are only 65 tweets listed. This was clearly set up specifically for this “pandemic”. There are also several examples cited of their work making its way into mainstream outlets. The site also contains a database of disinformation and debunked claims to go through.

2. Who Is Behind DisinfoWatch’s Media Efforts?

DisinfoWatch.org is the Macdonald-Laurier Institute’s new COVID-19 and foreign disinformation monitoring and debunking platform. http://macdonaldlaurier.ca

That quote is from the Twitter profile. On the website, near the bottom, 2 organizations are listed, and it’s implied that they are behind everything.

  • Journalists For Human Rights
  • MacDonald-Laurier Institute

Both entities will be addressed in the following sections. Things are not quite what they seem to be, as the rabbit hole goes much deeper.

3. MacDonald-Laurier Part Of Atlas Network

  • Alberta Institute
  • Canadian Constitution Foundation
  • Canadian Taxpayers Federation
  • Canadians For Democracy And Transparency
  • Fraser Institute
  • Frontier Center For Public Policy
  • Institute For Liberal Studies
  • Justice Center For Constitutional Freedoms
  • MacDonald-Laurier Institute For Public Policy
  • Manning Center
  • Montreal Economic Institute
  • World Taxpayers Federation

Atlas’ partners can be searched instantly online. When this last piece was written, Atlas Network had 12 Canadian partners. A few changes have been made, and now there are currently 11.

  • Alberta Institute
  • Canadian Constitution Foundation
  • Canadian Taxpayers Federation
  • Canadians For Democracy And Transparency
  • Fraser Institute
  • Frontier Center For Public Policy
  • Institute For Liberal Studies
  • MacDonald-Laurier Institute For Public Policy
  • Manning Center
  • Montreal Economic Institute
  • Second Street

Both the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms and the World Taxpayers Federation are no longer listed as partners. However, the organization we are mostly interested in is the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.

Interesting aside, the JCCF, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, is responsible for filing several court actions against Provincial Governments.

Also, Alberta Premier Jason Kenney used to be the President of the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation, which is also part of Atlas.

It’s not much of a secret that Atlas Network is a group of “conservative” and “libertarian” think tanks, and gets a substantial part of its funding from the Koch Brothers.

4. Staff Of MacDonald-Laurier Institute

Brett Byers is the Communications and Digital Media Manager for MLI. He also spent 2 1/2 years an an e-Communications Officer for the Trudeau Government.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/brett-byers-lane-63872710a/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/allison-carrigan-69045513/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/brianleecrowley/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/george-habchi-02853a195/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-watson-33740221/

Full list is available here.

5. Journalists For Human Rights (JHR) Donations

The project Mobilizing Media to Fight COVID-19, with a $1,479,857 contribution from Global Affairs Canada, is a COVID-19 crisis response project to train journalists: a) to ensure that COVID-19 reporting is scientifically accurate and technically sound and, thereby encouraging safer behaviours; and b) to work with citizens’ groups to identify mis/disinformation, particularly on social media, and to debunk harmful myths surrounding COVID-19. The training will particularly focus on ensuring that information is being provided to women and marginalized communities, and that their needs and rights to adequate services are included in media coverage. Subject to the successful conclusion of discussions for the financial instrument, the project implementation partner, Journalists for HumanRights (JHR), will work in the following 12 African and Middle Eastern countries: Gambia, Ghana, Iraq, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania, Tunisia, Uganda, Yemen.

Journalists for Human Rights has received a few large grants from taxpayers, including nearly $1.5 million in 2020 as a form of “Covid relief”. Perhaps this is cynical, but it may explain their mission to combat misinformation.

6. Peter Donolo: JHR, Longtime LPC Operative

Peter Donolo is a longtime Liberal operative. He was Chretien’s Communications Director, he worked in the Office of the Official Opposition for Michael Ignatieff, and other political roles. Ignatieff, incidently, is now a Vice-President of Soros’ Open Society Group.

Donolo is also now a Board Member at CIVIX and Journalists for Human Rights. He has ties to the Liberals, who are also funding various initiatives to counter misinformation.

7. Chad Rogers, Crestview Strategy

Chad Rogers not only works for JHR, but he’s a Co-Founder of the lobbying firm, Crestview Strategy. Another Co-Founder is Rob Silver, husband of Katie Telford, the Chief of Staff for Justin Trudeau. Incidently, Crestview was also involved in lobbying Canadian officials for money is relation to vaccines.

Looking through some of the other members, such as Michael Cooke and Karen Restoule, it’s clear the the Journalists for Human Rights actually are journalists with connections to the mainstream media.

8. JHS Agenda: Combatting Misinformation

Canadians need quality, trustworthy coverage for evidence-based public debate about issues that matter, to hold duty bearers accountable and to mobilize knowledge toward solutions to complex problems. JHR’s project, “Fighting Disinformation through Strengthened Media and Citizen Preparedness in Canada” trains journalists on best practices of combating disinformation and exposing deliberate manipulation of public opinion on social media, while concurrently engaging people in Canada on digital and news skills literacy to enhance citizen preparedness against online manipulation and misinformation.
.
This project has been made possible in part by the Government of Canada.

Canadians need reliable, quality coverage to hold factual debates on important issues, empower bondholders, and mobilize knowledge to find solutions to complex problems. JDH’s project, “Fighting Disinformation Through Media Strengthening and Preparing Citizens in Canada,” trains journalists in best practices to combat misinformation and expose the deliberate manipulation of public opinion on social media, while simultaneously engaging the Canadian public on digital literacy and news to build resilience against online manipulation and misinformation.
.
This project was made possible in part by the Government of Canada.

Straight from the source. This project was made possible — namely, funded — by the Canadian Government. The Journalists for Human Rights are less about journalism, and more about perpetuating the official narratives. While fact-checking stories is important, fact-checking the fact-checkers needs to be done as well.

These are the groups behind DisinfoWatch:
(a) Journalists for Human Rights
(b) MacDonald-Laurier Institute

9. No Wonder Government Measures Are Legal

DisinfoWatch has released many articles “debunking” so-called conspiracy theories, and trying to debunk claims that this is all about population control, and forcibly altering society. In fact, virtually all exposes that reveal Government deception are labelled hoaxes. Although, one has to wonder how many theories are put out by groups like DisinfoWatch, as an effort to make all claims seem ridiculous.

Posted on

Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy: Bailing Out Banks, Credit Unions, Media Companies

Go onto the CEWS section of the Canada Revenue Agency website, where it allows people to search for companies that have received this benefit. Type in “media“, and 1447 results come up. Stunning how many outlets have been approved under this program.

1. Buying Off Entire Canadian Media

Subsidization Programs Available For Media Outlets (QCJO)
Political Operatives Behind Many “Fact-Checking” Groups
Taxpayer Subsidies To Combat CV “Misinformation”
Postmedia Periodicals Getting Covid Subsidies
Aberdeen Publishing (BC, AB) Getting Grants To Operate
Other Periodicals Receiving Subsidies
Still More Media Subsidies Taxpayers Are Supporting

2. List Of Credit Unions Getting CEWS

-ABCU CREDIT UNION LTD.
-ACCENT CREDIT UNION
-BAY ST LAWRENCE CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-BEAUBEAR CREDIT UNION LTD
-BELGIAN-ALLIANCE CREDIT UNION LTD.
-BIGGAR AND DISTRICT CREDIT UNION
-BLACKVILLE CREDIT UNION LTD
-BOW VALLEY CREDIT UNION LTD
-Casera Credit Union Limited
-Cornerstone Credit Union Financial Group Limited
-Cornerstone Credit Union
-CANADIAN CREDIT UNION ASSOCIATION COOPERATIVE L’ASSOCIATION CANADIENNE DES COOPÉRATIVES D’ÉPARGNE ET DE CRÉDIT
-CAPE BRETON CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-CARPATHIA CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-CCEC CREDIT UNION
-COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-COMMUNITY SAVINGS CREDIT UNION
-CONEXUS CREDIT UNION 2006
-COPPERFIN CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-CREDIT UNION CENTRAL OF SASKATCHEWAN
-CROSSROADS CREDIT UNION
-CROSSTOWN CIVIC CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-CYPRESS CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-DIAMOND NORTH CREDIT UNION
-DUNDALK DISTRICT CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-EAGLE RIVER CREDIT UNION LTD
-EAST COAST CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-EASTERN EDGE CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-ENCOMPASS CREDIT UNION LTD.
-ENTEGRA CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-IMPLICITY FINANCIAL – A DIVISION OF ENTEGRA CREDIT UNION
-FOAM LAKE SAVINGS AND CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-FORT YORK COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-GANARASKA CREDIT UNION LTD
-GLACE BAY CENTRAL CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-HORIZON CREDIT UNION
-INNOVATION CREDIT UNION
-KOREAN (TORONTO) CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-KOREAN CATHOLIC CHURCH CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-Leading Edge Credit Union Limited
-LAFLECHE CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-LIBRO CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-Libro Credit Union
-ME-DIAN CREDIT UNION OF MANITOBA LIMITED
-MEMBER SAVINGS CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-MOMENTUM CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-MOUNT LEHMAN CREDIT UNION
-NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-NIVERVILLE CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-NORTH SYDNEY CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-ONTARIO EDUCATIONAL CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-PENFINANCIAL CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-PLAINSVIEW CREDIT UNION
-PRAIRIE CENTRE CREDIT UNION (2006) LTD.
-PRINCESS CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-PUBLIC SERVICE CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-RADIUS CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-REDDY KILOWATT CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-REDDY KILOWATT CREDIT UNION
-ROCKGLEN-KILLDEER CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-ROSENORT CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-Sunova Credit Union Limited
-Synergy Credit Union Ltd.
-SASKATOON CITY EMPLOYEES CREDIT UNION
-SOUTHWEST REGIONAL CREDIT UNION LTD
-SPARK THE ENERGY CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-ST. JOSEPH’S CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-STEINBACH CREDIT UNION LTD
-SCU SECURITIES
-STOUGHTON CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-SYDNEY CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-TANDIA FINANCIAL CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-TCU FINANCIAL GROUP CREDIT UNION
-THE ASSINIBOINE CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-ACU Wealth Management
-TRANSCANADA CREDIT UNION LTD
-UNITY CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-VENTURE CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-VERMILION CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-VISION CREDIT UNION LTD.
-WESTOBA CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-WEYBURN CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-WINNIPEG POLICE CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-YOUR CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-YOUR NEIGHBOURHOOD CREDIT UNION LIMITED
-1ST CHOICE SAVINGS AND CREDIT UNION LTD

Looking up the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy, under the search of “Credit Union“, results in a total of 81 hits. That doesn’t include institutions that operate without that in their name. All these companies have taken money from Ottawa in pandemic subsidies.

3. List Of Banks Getting CEWS

A search of CEWS for “bank” (see new link) results in 245 hits, most of which are irrelevant. While the big 5 are not listed, several smaller ones are, including the Bank of China. Very interesting to see where your tax dollars have been going.

Unfortunately, the amounts given out are not listed. It would have been helpful to include the actual dollar figures.

Posted on

The Other Provincial Health Acts Written By WHO-IHR

Welcome to the second part of the Provincial Health Acts of Canada. As you will see, elements of the 2005 Quarantine Act are written into them.

1. Other Articles On CV “Planned-emic”

The rest of the series is here. Many lies, lobbying, conflicts of interest, and various globalist agendas operating behind the scenes, obscuring the vile agenda called the GREAT RESET. The Gates Foundation finances: the WHO, the US CDC, GAVI, ID2020, John Hopkins University, Imperial College London, the Pirbright Institute, the BBC, and individual pharmaceutical companies. The International Health Regulations are legally binding. The Postmedia empire and the “independent” media are paid off, as are the fact-checkers. The virus was never isolated, PCR tests are a fraud, as are forced masks, social bubbles, and 2m distancing.

2. Important Links

https://www.ourcommons.ca/Committees/en/HESA/StudyActivity?studyActivityId=981075
https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/38-1/HESA/report-2/

(AB) https://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/P37.pdf
(SK) https://www.canlii.org/en/sk/laws/stat/ss-1994-c-p-37.1/11022/ss-1994-c-p-37.1.html
(MB) https://web2.gov.mb.ca/laws/statutes/ccsm/p210e.php
(ON) https://healthunit.org/wp-content/uploads/Health_Protection_and_Promotion_Act.pdf
CLICK HERE, for earlier piece on Provincial Health Acts

(QC) http://legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/en/ShowDoc/cs/S-2.2
(NB) http://laws.gnb.ca/en/showfulldoc/cs/P-22.4//20210220
(NS) https://nslegislature.ca/sites/default/files/legc/statutes/health%20protection.pdf
(NL) https://www.assembly.nl.ca/Legislation/sr/statutes/p37-3.htm
(PEI) Prince Edward Island Public Health Act
(YK) https://legislation.yukon.ca/acts/puhesa.pdf

3. Quebec Public Health Act

5. Public health actions must be directed at protecting, maintaining or enhancing the health status and well-being of the general population and shall not focus on individuals except insofar as such actions are taken for the benefit of the community as a whole or a group of individuals.
.
6. This Act is binding on the Government, on government departments and on bodies that are mandataries of the State.

CHAPTER IX
COMPULSORY TREATMENT AND PROPHYLACTIC MEASURES FOR CERTAIN CONTAGIOUS DISEASES OR INFECTIONS
DIVISION I
CONTAGIOUS DISEASES OR INFECTIONS AND COMPULSORY TREATMENT

83. The Minister may, by regulation, draw up a list of the contagious diseases or infections for which any person affected is obligated to submit to the medical treatments required to prevent contagion.
.
The list may include only contagious diseases or infections that are medically recognized as capable of constituting a serious threat to the health of a population and for which an effective treatment that would put an end to the contagion is available.
2001, c. 60, s. 83.

84. Any health professional with the authority to make a medical diagnosis or to assess a person’s state of health who observes that a person is likely suffering from a disease or infection to which this division applies must take, without delay, the required measures to ensure that the person receives the care required by his or her condition, or direct the person to a health and social services institution able to provide such treatments.
2001, c. 60, s. 84; 2020, c. 6, s. 25.

85. In the case of certain diseases or infections identified in the regulation, any health or social services institution having the necessary resources must admit as an emergency patient any person suffering or likely to be suffering from one of those diseases or infections. If the institution does not have the necessary resources, it must direct the person to an institution able to provide the required services.
2001, c. 60, s. 85.

86. Any health professional with the authority to make a medical diagnosis or to assess a person’s state of health who becomes aware that a person who is likely suffering from a disease or infection to which this division applies is refusing or neglecting to submit to an examination must notify the appropriate public health director as soon as possible.
.
Such a notice must also be given by any such professional who observes that a person is refusing or neglecting to submit to the required medical treatment or has discontinued a treatment that must be completed to prevent contagion or a recurrence of contagion.
2001, c. 60, s. 86; 2020, c. 6, s. 26.

87. Any public health director who receives a notice under section 86 must make an inquiry and, if the person refuses to be examined or to submit to the appropriate treatment, the public health director may apply to the Court for an order enjoining the person to submit to such examination or treatment.
2001, c. 60, s. 87.

88. A judge of the Court of Québec or of the municipal courts of the cities of Montréal, Laval or Québec having jurisdiction in the locality where the person is to be found may, if the judge believes on reasonable grounds that the protection of the health of the population so warrants, order the person to submit to an examination and receive the required medical treatment.
.
In addition, the judge may, if the judge believes on serious grounds that the person will refuse to submit to the examination or to receive the treatment, order that the person be taken to an institution maintained by a health or social services institution for examination and treatment. The provisions of section 108 apply to that situation, with the necessary modifications.
2001, c. 60, s. 88.

DIVISION II
COMPULSORY PROPHYLACTIC MEASURES
.
89. The Minister may, for certain contagious diseases or infections medically recognized as capable of constituting a serious threat to the health of a population, make a regulation setting out prophylactic measures to be complied with by a person suffering or likely to be suffering from such a disease or infection, as well as by any person having been in contact with that person.
.
Isolation, for a maximum period of 30 days, may form part of the prophylactic measures prescribed in the regulation of the Minister.
.
The regulation shall prescribe the circumstances and conditions in which specific prophylactic measures are to be complied with to prevent contagion. It may also require certain health or social services institutions to admit as an emergency patient any person suffering or likely to be suffering from one of the contagious diseases or infections to which this section applies, as well as any person who has been in contact with that person.
2001, c. 60, s. 89.

90. Any health professional who observes that a person is omitting, neglecting or refusing to comply with the prophylactic measures prescribed in the regulation made under section 89 must notify the appropriate public health director as soon as possible.
.
The director must make an inquiry and, if the person refuses to comply with the necessary prophylactic measures, the director may apply to the Court for an order enjoining the person to do so.
The provisions of section 88 apply to that situation, with the necessary modifications.
The director may also, in the case of an emergency, use the powers conferred by section 103, and sections 108 and 109 apply to such a situation.
2001, c. 60, s. 90.

91. Despite any decision of the Court ordering the isolation of a person, isolation must cease as soon as the attending physician, after consulting the appropriate public health director, issues a certificate to the effect that the risk of contagion no longer exists.

Good old Quebec, where doctors can have you forcibly detained and “treated” based on the vague suspicion that you may have a communicable illness. And of course, the Court can have you locked up and isolated for 30 days at a time based on these suspicions.

4. New Brunswick Public Health Act

Duty to report contacts
2002, c.23, s.10; 2017, c.42, s.35
31A medical practitioner, nurse practitioner, midwife or nurse shall, in accordance with the regulations, report the person’s contacts related to a notifiable disease or notifiable event prescribed by regulation to a medical officer of health or person designated by the Minister, if the medical practitioner, nurse practitioner, midwife or nurse
(a) provides professional services to a person who has a notifiable disease prescribed by regulation or has suffered a notifiable event prescribed by regulation, or
(b) provided professional services to a deceased person before that person’s death and that person had a notifiable disease prescribed by regulation or had suffered a notifiable event prescribed by regulation.
2002, c.23, s.10; 2007, c.63, s.10; 2011, c.26, s.4; 2017, c.42, s.36

Duty to report refusal or neglect of treatment
2017, c.42, s.37
32A medical practitioner or nurse practitioner shall report to a medical officer of health, in accordance with the regulations, if a person who is under the care and treatment of the medical practitioner or the nurse practitioner in respect of a Group I notifiable disease refuses or neglects to continue the treatment in a manner and to a degree satisfactory to the medical practitioner or the nurse practitioner, as the case may be.
2017, c.42, s.38

Order respecting notifiable disease
2017, c.42, s.39
33(1)Subject to subsection (2), a medical officer of health by a written order may require a person to take or refrain from taking any action that is specified in the order in respect of a notifiable disease.
.
33(2)A medical officer of health may make an order under this section if he or she believes on reasonable grounds,
(a) that a notifiable disease exists or may exist in a health region,
(b) that the notifiable disease presents a risk to the health of persons in the health region, and
(c) that the requirements specified in the order are necessary to prevent, decrease or eliminate the risk to health presented by the notifiable disease.

33(3)In an order under this section, a medical officer of health may specify the time or times when or the period or periods of time within which the person to whom the order is directed must comply with the order.

33(4)An order under this section may include, but is not limited to,
(a) requiring any person that the order states has or may have a notifiable disease or is or may be infected with an agent of a notifiable disease to isolate himself or herself and remain in isolation from other persons,
.
(b) requiring the person to whom the order is directed to submit to an examination by a medical practitioner or a nurse practitioner and to deliver to the medical officer of health a report by the medical practitioner or nurse practitioner as to whether or not the person has a notifiable disease or is infected with an agent of a notifiable disease,
(c) requiring the person to whom the order is directed in respect of a disease that is a notifiable disease to place himself or herself under the care and treatment of a medical practitioner or nurse practitioner without delay, and
.
(d) requiring the person to whom the order is directed to conduct himself or herself in such a manner as not to expose another person to infection.

This is the Public Health Act of New Brunswick.

5. Nova Scotia Health Protection Act

COMMUNICABLE DISEASES
Powers respecting communicable diseases
32 (1) Where a medical officer is of the opinion, upon reasonable and probable grounds, that
(a) a communicable disease exists or may exist or that there is an immediate risk of an outbreak of a communicable disease;
(b) the communicable disease presents a risk to the public health; and
(c) the requirements specified in the order are necessary in order to decrease or eliminate the risk to the public health presented by the communicable disease, the medical officer may by written order require a person to take or to refrain from taking any action that is specified in the order in respect of a communicable disease

32 (3) Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), an order
made under this Section may
(a) require the owner or occupier of premises to close the premises or a part of the premises or to restrict access to the premises;
(b) require the displaying of signage on premises to give notice of an order requiring the closing of the premises;
(c) require any person that the order states has been exposed or may have been exposed to a communicable disease to quarantine himself or herself from other persons;
(d) require any person who has a communicable disease or is infected with an agent of a communicable disease to isolate himself or herself from other persons;
(e) require the cleaning or disinfecting, or both, of the premises or any thing specified in the order;
(f) require the destruction of any matter or thing specified in the order;
(g) require the person to whom the order is directed to submit to an examination by a physician who is acceptable to a medical officer and to deliver to the medical officer a report by the physician as to whether or not the person has a communicable disease or is or is not infected with an agent of a communicable disease;
(h) require the person to whom the order is directed in respect of a communicable disease to place himself or herself forthwith under the care and treatment of a physician who is acceptable to a medical officer;
(i) require the person to whom the order is directed to conduct himself or herself in such a manner as not to expose another person to infection.

Court may ensure compliance
38 (1) Where, upon application by a medical officer, a judge of the provincial court is satisfied that
(a) a person has failed to comply with an order by a medical officer made under to Section 32 that
(i) the person quarantine himself or herself from other persons,
(ii) the person isolate himself or herself from other persons,
(iii) the person submit to an examination by a physician who is acceptable to the medical officer,
(iv) the person place himself or herself under the care and treatment of a physician who is acceptable to the
medical officer, or
(v) the person conduct himself or herself in such a manner as not to expose another person to infection,
the judge may order that the person who has failed to comply with the order of the medical officer
(b) be taken into custody and be admitted to and detained in a quarantine facility named in the order;
(c) be taken into custody and be admitted to, detained and treated in an isolation facility named in the order;
(d) be examined by a physician who is acceptable to the medical officer to ascertain whether or not the person is infected with an agent of a communicable disease; or
(e) where found on examination to be infected with an agent of a communicable disease, be treated for the disease.
(2) Where an order made by a judge pursuant to subsection (1) is to be carried out by a physician or other health professional, the failure of the person subject to such an order to consent does not constitute an assault or battery against that person by the physician or other health professional should the order be carried out.
(3) A physician or other health professional carrying out an order pursuant to subsection (1) may obtain such assistance from a peace officer or other person as the physician or health professional reasonably believes is necessary.
(4) A judge shall not name an isolation facility or quarantine facility in an order under this Section unless the judge is satisfied that the isolation facility or quarantine facility is able to provide detention, care and treatment as required for the person who is the subject of the order. 2004, c. 4, s. 38.

Authority to apprehend and isolate or quarantine
39 (1) An order made under Section 38 is authority for any person to
(a) locate and apprehend the person who is the subject of the order; and
(b) deliver the person who is the subject of the order to the isolation facility or quarantine facility named in the order or to a physician for examination.
(2) An order made under Section 38 may be directed to a police force that has jurisdiction in the area where the person who is the subject of the order may be located, and the police force shall do all things reasonably able to be done to locate, apprehend and deliver the person to an isolation or quarantine facility in the jurisdiction where the person was apprehended or to an isolation or quarantine facility specified in the order.
(3) A person who apprehends a person who is the subject of an order pursuant to subsection (2) shall promptly
(a) inform the person of the reasons for the apprehension and of the person’s right to retain and instruct counsel without delay; and
(b) tell the person where the person is being taken.
(4) An order made under clause 38(1)(c) is authority to detain the person who is the subject of the order in the isolation facility named in the order and to care for and examine the person and to treat the person for the communicable disease in accordance with generally accepted medical practice for a period of not more than four months from and including the day that the order was issued.
(5) An order made under clause 38(1)(b) is authority to detain the person who is the subject of the order in the quarantine facility named in the order and to care for and examine the person for the incubation period of the communicable disease as determined by the judge.

Nova Scotia, like the others, can force a person to submit to a “medical examination” and do whatever is demanded of the health care provider

6. Newfoundland Public Health

Communicable disease orders
32. (1) A regional medical officer of health may make a communicable disease order under this section where he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that
(a) a communicable disease exists or may exist or that there is an immediate risk of an outbreak of a communicable disease;
(b) the communicable disease presents a risk to the health of the population; and
(c) the order is necessary to prevent, eliminate, remedy, or mitigate the risk to the health of the population.
(2) A regional medical officer of health may make a communicable disease order in respect of a person who has or may have a communicable disease or is infected with an infectious agent and the order may do one or more of the following:
(a) require the person to submit to an examination by a specified health care professional at a specified health facility on or before a particular date or according to a schedule;
(b) require the person to isolate himself or herself from other persons, including in a specified health facility;
(c) require the person to conduct himself or herself in a manner that will not expose other persons to infection or to take other precautions to prevent or limit the direct or indirect transmission of the communicable disease or infectious agent to those who are susceptible to the communicable disease or infectious agent or who may spread the communicable disease or infectious agent to others;
(d) prohibit or restrict the person from attending a school, a place of employment or other public premises or from using a public conveyance;
(e) prohibit or restrict the person from engaging in his or her occupation or another specified occupation or type of occupation;
(f) prohibit or restrict the person from leaving or entering a specified premises;
(g) require the person to avoid physical contact with, or being near, a person, animal or thing;
(h) require the person to be under the supervision or care of a specified person;
(i) require a person to provide information, records or other documents relevant to the person’s possible infection to a specified person;
(j) require a person to provide samples of the person’s clothing or possessions to a specified person;
(k) require a person to destroy contaminated clothing or possessions;
(l) require a person to provide specimens previously collected from the person to a specified person;
(m) where a regional medical officer of health has reasonable grounds to believe that the person has a communicable disease or is infected with an infectious agent, require the person to undergo treatment specified in the order or by a specified health care professional, including attending a specified health facility, where there is no other reasonable method available to mitigate the risks of the infection;
(n) require a person to disclose the identity and location of the persons with whom the person may have had contact or whom the person may have exposed to the communicable disease or infectious agent; or
(o) require the person to take, or prohibit the person from taking, an action prescribed in the regulations.

Apprehension orders and treatment orders generally
.
37. (1) A regional medical officer of health or a person subject to an apprehension order or treatment order may apply to the Supreme Court to vary, terminate or suspend the order.
(2) Where the application is made by a regional medical officer of health, the variation, termination or suspension of an apprehension order or treatment order may be issued on an application made under subsection (1) without notice and in the absence of the person subject to the order.
(3) Where the application is made by the person subject to the order, the apprehension order or treatment order shall not be varied, terminated or suspended unless the regional medical officer of health has been served with the application made under subsection (1).
(4) An apprehension order and a treatment order shall specify the health facility where the person subject to the order shall be detained, isolated, quarantined, examined and treated.
(5) Notwithstanding another provision of this Act, a judge shall not specify a health facility in an apprehension order or treatment order unless he or she is satisfied that the health facility is able to provide for the detainment, isolation, quarantine, examination or treatment as required in the order.
(6) Where an apprehension order or treatment order has been made, the person in charge of the health facility specified in the order shall ensure that
(a) the person subject to an apprehension order is detained, isolated or quarantined in accordance with the order; and
(b) the person subject to a treatment order is examined and treated in accordance with the order.
(7) The person in charge of the health facility specified in an apprehension order or treatment order shall immediately report to the regional medical officer of health regarding
(a) the results of the examination and treatment of the person subject to the order;
(b) the health status of the person subject to the order; and
(c) any change in the diagnosis or health status of the person subject to the order.
(8) A regional medical officer of health shall monitor the treatment and condition of a person subject to an apprehension order or treatment order and shall issue a certificate authorizing the release and discharge of the person immediately where he or she is of the opinion that
(a) the person is no longer infectious with a communicable disease; and
(b) discharging the person would not present a serious risk to the health of the population.
(9) A regional medical officer of health shall file a certificate issued under subsection (8) with the court that issued the apprehension order or treatment order.
(10) Notwithstanding any term or condition of an apprehension order or treatment order, the order is terminated immediately upon the issuance of a certificate under subsection (8) or the termination of the order under subsection 46(5).

Newfoundland & Labrador, like the other Provinces, allows for “medical officers” to order people detained and subjected to treatment, based on suspicions. The text is almost identical to the others.

7. Prince Edward Island Public Health

42. Order of court to detain, examine or treat a person
(1) The Chief Public Health Officer may make an application to the court for an order under this section where a person has failed to comply with an order issued by the Chief Public Health Officer in respect of a communicable disease specified in the regulations that
(a) the person isolate himself or herself and remain in isolation from other persons;
(b) the person submit to an examination by a medical practitioner;
(c) the person place himself or herself under the care and treatment of a medical practitioner;
(d) the person conduct himself or herself in such a manner as not to expose another person to infection; and
Public Health Act
.
PART II — PUBLIC HEALTH PROTECTION
Section 42
ct Updated June 12, 2018 Page 25
(e) the person provide information respecting the person’s contacts related to the communicable disease to the Chief Public Health Officer.
Court order
(2) Where the court is satisfied that a person has failed to comply with an order issued by the Chief Public Health Officer under section 39 or 40, the court may order, with respect to the person named in the order, any or all of the following:
(a) that the person be taken into custody and admitted to and detained in a health facility named in the order;
(b) that the person be examined by a medical practitioner to ascertain whether or not a person is infected with an agent of a communicable disease specified in the regulations;
(c) that the person, if found on examination to be infected with an agent of a communicable disease specified in the regulations, be treated for the disease;
(d) that the person, if found on examination to be infected with an agent of a communicable disease specified in the regulations, provide information respecting the person’s contacts related to the communicable disease to the Chief Public Health
Officer.
Ex parte application
(3) An application under subsection (1) may be made ex parte and where so made the court may
make an interim order under subsection (2).

43. Designation of medical practitioner to have responsibility for detained person
The administrator or person in charge of a health facility shall designate a medical practitioner to have responsibility for a person named in an order issued under section 42 who is delivered to a health facility. 2012(2nd),c.20,s.43.
.
44. Medical practitioner to report respecting detained person The medical practitioner responsible for a person named in an order made under section 42 shall report in respect of the treatment and the condition of the person to the Chief Public Health Officer in the manner, at the times and with the information specified by the Chief
Public Health Officer. 2012(2nd),c.20,s.44.
.
45. Extension of period of detention
Where upon application of the Chief Public Health Officer the court is satisfied
(a) that the person continues to be infected with an agent of a communicable disease specified in the regulations; and
(b) that the discharge of the person from the health facility would present a significant risk to the health of the public, the court may by order extend the period of detention for not more than three months, and upon further applications by the Chief Public Health Officer, the court may extend the period of detention and treatment for further periods, each of which shall not be for more than three months. 2012(2nd),c.20,s.45.

Prince Edward Island allows Courts to detain people for up to 3 months at a time, and all under the guise of public health. Not that it will ever be abused for political reasons.

8. Medical Tyranny As “Public Health”

The content of these carious Provincial Health Acts overlaps considerably. These unelected medical officers are able to detain people, close businesses, and suspend basic liberties, all under the pretense of public safety.

In any other context, this would be considered dictatorial. But this gets a pass from the mainstream media. Wonder why they don’t address it.

Many Other Periodicals Receiving Government Subsidies
Other Subsidies Propping Up Canadian Media
Taxpayer Subsidies To Combat CV “Misinformation”
Aberdeen Publishing Sells Out, Takes Subsidies
Postmedia Periodicals Getting Covid Subsidies

Canadian Media Subsidized By Taxpayers, Biased
Media Subsidies To Combat Online Misinformation

*Disclaimers, Ethics* Proudly powered by WordPress