Dear Constituent,
Thank you for contacting me regarding the World Health Organisation’s negotiations regarding the International Health Regulations and pandemic preparedness.
I appreciate your concerns about this issue; however, the Government will not (and neither would I) support any treaty or reform which compromises the UK's sovereignty. In my view, there is nothing in the proposed reforms that would impact our ability to take decisions at the national level. That is also the Government’s position but I say that as somebody who has been concerned about issues of freedoms and been prepared to speak out on such issues in the past. For example, I have spoken out in the past about aspects of the Government’s response to the pandemic such as here – Richard Fuller: "Do we fully appreciate the scale of what we have done?" | Richard Fuller -, refused on a number of occasions to support the extension of the restrictions in and duration of the Coronavirus Act and was prepared to vote against the Government on the question of personal freedoms when the Government wanted to have vaccination as a mandatory condition of employment in certain sectors.
In view of the concerns raised with me previously about the proposed Treaty and the International Health Regulations, I wrote to the relevant minister to seek further reassurance on the 31st March. I attach his response.
In the meantime, I have read the transcript of the recent debate on these issues, including the Minister’s response, including some of the assurances given by her, is here: Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response: Intern - Hansard - UK Parliament, including the following comment: “The speculation that somehow the instrument will undermine UK sovereignty and give WHO powers over national public health measures is simply not the case. I absolutely reassure both my right hon. Friend and my hon. Friend the Member for Hastings and Rye (Sally-Ann Hart), who raised a similar issue earlier, on behalf of all their constituents: that is not the case. The UK remains in control of any future domestic decisions about public health matters—such as domestic vaccination—that might be needed in any future pandemic that we may have to manage. Protecting those national sovereign rights is a distinct principle in the existing draft text. Other Members have also identified that as an important priority, so it is good to have the opportunity of this debate, brought about by those who have concerns, to restate that that is absolutely not under threat.”
Thank you for getting in touch.
Sincerely,
