Inquiry into British Government handling of the 2020/22 Covid 'Epidemic'

https://www.google.com/search?q=elephant+in+the+room&rlz=1C1ARAB_enGB463GB464&sxsrf=ALiCzsZrNwmkVUMIS3pjbCj6irAtrp_ztw:1652778519652&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=2ahUKEwiOtbnkl-b3AhVKkIkEHUHqA4kQ_AUoAXoECAIQAw&biw=1262&bih=864&dpr=1#imgrc=tbxajWJtPaix9M

Next wave?   Drbeen Medical Lectures  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G98hbHc8hE

Drbeen Medical Lectures

565K subscribers

SUBSCRIBED

Monkeypox Unexpectedly Emerges in UK, Portugal, Spain, US, and Canada Western countries are experiencing a surge of monkeypox that is transmitted by potentially sexual contact. A transmission method not observed in the past.

Governments are notorious for setting up Public Enquiries that appear to have a blind spot for elephants (in the room)! The trick is to to make them so far ranging and take such time, whilst avoiding the crucial questions, that by the time they report the issue will be seen as old hat and irrelevant. Politics will have moved on, many will have retired or died, memories will have faded, other issues taken its place, interest and passion faded. Will that be the epitaph of this latest enquiry into the Covid debacle? Will it ever get to the bottom of how a nation could have completely lost touch with reality and reason or who was really driving the madness that had such disastrous consequences?

Despite what appears to be comprehensive terms  of reference, I wonder if any of them address the fundamental issues.  For example they do not include the basic ones of how the virus - so called - was created and managed so rapidly to reveal itself in Italy.  It excludes the whole area of the microscopic nature of the virus entity and the significant variations and manipulations to its genetic structure. It seems to avoid the whole question of the development of various proprietary mRNA vaccines and their efficacy or adverse effects. 

The important question of how and why it was thought necessary to replace the existing statutory framework and physical precautions with a set of new draconian and ineffective measures or how they were policed, seem to be dodged.  Nor is there any focus on the harms caused by the widespread application of experimental vaccines. In focusing in on administrative details and the painful experiences of people facing loss, separation and isolation, the important questions of what drove the panic, the reliability of its statistical and scientific underpinning and the wisdom and probity of the huge (£400 billion plus) can usefully be ignored.

All these features point to yet another lengthy, costly and largely pointless inquiry, that, with a few minor exceptions, will exonerate the Government in the handling of it and avoid criticism of individuals or organisations, whilst contextualising the harms to a point of nothingness. No doubt witnesses will be carefully chosen not to rock the boat whilst drowning in a sea of insincere empathy for the suffering caused. After several years of this process in which only lawyers and Civil Servants benefit, we shall be none the wiser and no more protected from bugs or tyrannical rulers.

I'm sorry to say it, but if people had taken notice of my warnings, this young person, and countless others, would still be alive. The policy of the British Government in the Covid scam, must turn out to be the biggest public health disaster in British history!
https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/local-news/south-west-man-26-died-7093530?int_source=nba

https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/

https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/.../2022_05_12_Chair...

https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/.../FINAL-Consultation...

Contents

Foreword 4

Introduction 5

How are the Terms of Reference decided? 6

Consultation analysis and summary of results 8

Question 1: Do the Inquiry’s draft Terms of Reference cover all the areas that you think

should be addressed by the Inquiry? 8

The impact of the pandemic on children and young people 8

Management of the health and care sectors during the pandemic 10

The government’s communication strategy and the role of the media 12

The role of experts, advisers, science and data in informing the government’s

pandemic response 13

The impact of the pandemic and its response on mental health and wellbeing 14

The economic costs of the pandemic and its response, and the role of cost-benefit

analysis in lockdown and other closure decisions 15

Other issues raised during the consultation 16

Question 2: Which issues or topics should the Inquiry look at first? 22

Question 3: Should the Inquiry set a planned end date for its public hearings? 23

Question 4: How should the Inquiry be designed and run to ensure that bereaved

people or those who have suffered serious harm or hardship as a result of the

pandemic have their voices heard? 24

What happens next? 25

Annex: Recommended Terms of Reference

Introduction The UK Covid-19 Inquiry is being established to examine the UK’s preparedness and response to the Covid-19 pandemic, and to learn lessons for the future. Baroness Hallett, a former appeal court judge, was appointed as the Inquiry’s Chair in December 2021. She will lead the Inquiry and has, since then, been building an Inquiry team to support her. This Inquiry is unlike any other previous UK statutory inquiry. It is not looking into a single event or series of events, or why it or they happened. Instead, it will be investigating how a pandemic struck an entire country (in fact, four countries), and how the UK Government, Devolved Administrations, local government, and many other parts of the state responded, across almost the entire range of their decision-making and public functions. With such an unprecedented potential scope, this Inquiry needs to be as clear as possible about what we will investigate, and how we should do so. This will be set out, at a high level, in our ‘Terms of Reference’, which will provide the overall shape and limits of the topics to be examined. The Prime Minister is responsible for setting the Terms of Reference. For an Inquiry looking at such a broad subject as the Covid-19 pandemic, it is not practical for the Terms of Reference to set out an exhaustive list of every issue that will be addressed. It would not be possible, or indeed advisable, to identify everything we need to examine at this early stage of our work, and we will need to retain the flexibility to examine new issues as they are identified from the evidence collected. The Terms of Reference therefore set out a series of broad topics, which will be developed into a detailed list of issues and investigations as the Inquiry progresses. An issue does not need to be explicitly listed within the Terms of Reference for us to be able to examine it, so long as it fits within one of those broad topics.

Annex: Recommended Terms of Reference UK COVID-19 INQUIRY TERMS OF REFERENCE – MAY 2022 The Inquiry will examine, consider and report on preparations and the response to the pandemic in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, up to and including the Inquiry’s formal setting-up date, xx xxxx 2022. In carrying out its work, the Inquiry will: a) consider reserved and devolved matters across the United Kingdom, as necessary, but will seek to minimise duplication of investigation, evidence gathering and reporting with any other public inquiry established by the devolved administrations; b) consider any disparities evident in the impact of the pandemic on different categories of people, including, but not limited to, protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 and equality categories under the Northern Ireland Act 1998; c) listen to and consider carefully the experiences of bereaved families and others who have suffered hardship or loss as a result of the pandemic. Although the inquiry will not consider in detail individual cases of harm or death, listening to these accounts will inform its understanding of the impact of the pandemic and the response, and of the lessons to be learned; d) highlight where lessons identified from preparedness and the response to the pandemic may be applicable to other civil emergencies; e) have reasonable regard to relevant international comparisons; and f) produce its reports (including interim reports) and any recommendations in a timely manner. The aims of the Inquiry are to: 1) Examine the COVID-19 response and the impact of the pandemic in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, and produce a factual narrative account, including: a) The public health response across the UK, including: i) preparedness and resilience; ii) how decisions were made, communicated, recorded, and implemented; 26 iii) intergovernmental decision-making; iv) collaboration between central government, devolved administrations, regional and local authorities, and the voluntary and community sector; v) the availability and use of data, research and expert evidence; vi) legislative and regulatory control and enforcement; vii) shielding and the protection of the clinically vulnerable; viii) the use of lockdowns and other ‘non-pharmaceutical’ interventions such as social distancing and the use of face coverings; ix) testing, contact tracing, and isolation; x) the impact on the mental health and wellbeing of the population, including but not limited to those who were harmed significantly by the pandemic; xi) the impact on the mental health and wellbeing of the bereaved, including post-bereavement support; xii) the impact on health and care sector workers and other key workers; xiii) the impact on children and young people, including health, wellbeing and social care; xiv) education and early years provision; xv) the closure and reopening of the hospitality, retail, sport and leisure and travel and tourism sectors, places of worship, and cultural institutions; xvi) housing and homelessness; xvii) safeguarding and support for victims of domestic abuse; xviii) prisons and other places of detention; xix) the justice system; xx) immigration and asylum; xxi) travel and borders; and xxii) the safeguarding of public funds and management of financial risk. b) The response of the health and care sector across the UK, including: i) preparedness, initial capacity and the ability to increase capacity, and resilience; ii) initial contact with official healthcare advice services such as 111 and 999; iii) the role of primary care settings such as General Practice; iv) the management of the pandemic in hospitals, including infection prevention and control, triage, critical care capacity, the discharge of patients, the use of ‘Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation’ (DNACPR) decisions, the approach to palliative care, workforce testing, changes to inspections, and the impact on staff and staffing levels; 27 v) the management of the pandemic in care homes and other care settings, including infection prevention and control, the transfer of residents to or from homes, treatment and care of residents, restrictions on visiting, workforce testing and changes to inspections; vi) care in the home, including by unpaid carers; vii) antenatal and postnatal care; viii) the procurement and distribution of key equipment and supplies, including PPE and ventilators; ix) the development, delivery and impact of therapeutics and vaccines; x) the consequences of the pandemic on provision for non-COVID related conditions and needs; and xi) provision for those experiencing long-COVID. c) The economic response to the pandemic and its impact, including government interventions by way of: i) support for businesses, jobs and the self-employed, including the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme, loans schemes, business rates relief and grants; ii) additional funding for relevant public services; iii) additional funding for the voluntary and community sector; and iv) benefits and sick pay, and support for vulnerable people. 2) Identify the lessons to be learned from the above, to inform the UK’s preparations for future pandemics.

Dear Timothy T. Veater,

The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Do not sign any WHO Pandemic Treaty unless it is approved via public referendum”.

Government responded:

To protect lives, the economy and future generations from future pandemics, the UK government supports a new legally-binding instrument to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.

COVID-19 has demonstrated that no-one is safe until we are all safe, and that effective global cooperation is needed to better protect the UK and other countries around the world from the detrimental health, social and economic impacts of pandemics and other health threats. The UK supports a new international legally-binding instrument as part of a cooperative and comprehensive approach to pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.

At a World Health Assembly Special Session in late 2021, the 194 countries of the World Health Organization (WHO) agreed to launch a process to draft and negotiate a new instrument, through the auspices of WHO, to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. The negotiating process will be led by member states, including the UK.

The instrument aims to improve how the world prevents, better prepares for, and responds to future disease outbreaks of pandemic potential at national, regional and global level. It would complement the existing international instruments which the UK has already agreed, such as the International Health Regulations. It would promote greater collective action and accountability.

A treaty is an international agreement concluded between States or with international organisations in written form and governed by international law. The UK is party to a large number of multilateral treaties, including many through the United Nations (UN) and its specialised agencies such as the WHO. These instruments reflect obligations states have agreed to enter into to further common goals.

The current target date for agreeing the text of the new instrument is at the World Health Assembly in May 2024. Over the next two years the UK aims to work towards building a consensus on how the global community can better prevent, prepare for, and respond to future pandemics and will actively shape, develop and negotiate the text. The new instrument would only be adopted by the World Health Assembly if the text achieves a two-thirds vote of the Health Assembly (Article 19 of the WHO Constitution). The Health Assembly is made up of representatives of WHO Member States.

Once adopted, the instrument would only become binding on the UK if and when the UK accepts (ratifies) it in accordance with its constitutional process. In the UK this requires the treaty to be laid before Parliament for a period of 21 sitting days before the Government can ratify it on behalf of the UK.

The Government always carefully considers whether domestic legislation will be required to implement the UK’s international obligations when negotiating a treaty. Not every treaty requires implementing legislation and it is too early to say if that would apply here. However, in all circumstances, the UK’s ability to exercise its sovereignty would remain unchanged and the UK would remain in control of any future domestic decisions about national restrictions or other measures.

If changes to UK law were considered necessary or appropriate to reflect obligations under the treaty, proposals for domestic legislation would go through the usual Parliamentary process and the UK would not ratify the treaty until domestic measures, agreed by Parliament, were in place.

This process of ratification allows scrutiny by elected representatives of both the treaty and any appropriate domestic legislation in accordance with the UK’s constitutional arrangements. The Government does not consider a referendum is necessary, appropriate or in keeping with precedent for such an agreement.

Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

Click this link to view the response online:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/614335?reveal_response=yes

This petition has over 100,000 signatures. The Petitions Committee will consider it for a debate. They can also gather further evidence and press the government for action.

The Committee is made up of 11 MPs, from political parties in government and in opposition. It is entirely independent of the Government. Find out more about the Committee: https://petition.parliament.uk/help#petitions-committee

Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament