The WHO (UN) International Health Regulations are reported to be the most important multilateral treaty that regulates the global architecture for Health, Emergency, Preparedness, Response and Resilience (HEPR Architecture). Amendment to the WHO (UN) International Health Regulations, and a new  WHO International Pandemic Treaty (Accord) will be introduced at the World Health Assembly in May 2024. Both Helen Clark and Ashley Bloom has been in Geneva working on the Pandemic Treaty and the WHO IHR 2005 Regulations.  Ashley Bloomfield represented as Co chair for the West Pacific Region. Helen Clark Co Chair of the WHO International Pandemic Treaty working council.

The WHO International Health Regulations are being amended by unelected bureaucrats representing UN Nation States. There are major concerns about the Pandemic Treaty and the amendments to the IHR 2005 Regulations. Particularly as to the enormous extended powers of the World Health Organization (UN). Art 12 (1) of the IHR 2005 gives the Director General of WHO (UN) sweeping powers to declare a Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) otherwise known as an ‘Extraordinary Event’ which is determined to constitute a ‘Public Health Risk’ to other States.

A new category has been added to the IHR 2005 namely  ‘Intermediate Public Health Alert’ requiring ‘Heightened International Awareness’ of an undefined low threshold (Proposed in Article 12 (6) safeguards WHO against any  accusation of their powers to abuse the global system of Health preparedness and response. (Immunity). The Director General of WHO in response to such emergencies is to issue recommendations to States to adopt  Medical and Non-medical countermeasures this can have  far reaching implications on livelihoods, health, human rights and the economy of Member States. (Articles 15-17 and 48-49)

This can fast track, trigger development of a global distribution of unlicensed  investigational diagnostics, jabs through the WHO Emergency Use Listing Procedure (EULP). The fast tracking of emergency human trials (guineapig states). Proposed amendments (Art 12 (1)  9 and 10 increases the WHO powers over UN Nation States. Restricts States Sovereign Rights to legislate and implement legislation in pursuance of health policies set out in Article 3 (4) IHR. Also relies on the WHO powers to assess an alleged ‘Global Health Risk’ by relying on information outside of official channels. Thus giving UN Nation States only 24 hrs to verify WHO information to collaborate with the allegations that WHO have made, even if those allegations are unjustified.2

Who guards Who here, who guards the Human Rights, Freedoms of the people to voluntary consent? As citizens of NZ we should be highly concerned about losing our freedoms and rights to ‘Self- determination’ as a Sovereign Nations. The people are the Sovereign Nation. Those that reside behind the closed doors of Parliament are our servants not vice versa.  New Zealand’s I urge you to seek open public debate from those in Parliament because “if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck it probably is a duck”. We have Zilch transparency, no responsibility or accountability shown by those politicians.. the secrecy remains around the WHO Global Health Agenda. This certainly appears to be a top down dystopian dictatorship

A Global Health Architecture that covers everything in life on this earth through the embedded ‘One Health Approach’ that is entrenched in the International Health Regulations and the International Pandemic Treaty (Accord), this also includes compliance and obedience to the UN WHO Director General calling an Emergency Global Boiling Emergency (I kid you not) The ‘One Health Approach’. The control, management of ALL Human , Animals- wild and domestic, oceans, seas, rivers, estuaries, soil, plant life the whole Eco-System’. A top down unelected technocratic bureaucratic global health governance that make decisions over everyone’s lives. Using the COVID 19 Pandemic to justify this.

NZ’s members of Parliament are voted in, entrusted by the people, the people are the Sovereignty of NZ. They are put their to protect and  safeguard our freedoms, human rights, our country’s sovereign rights as a Nation State. There is no voice for the people to challenge this Global Health Governance in the public arena. Why would you trust these unelected bureaucratic, technocratic when they cannot even admit to the serious harms and deaths of all those people whom have died , seriously harmed by the ‘Human Guinea Pig Trials’ that they have supported and promoted (NZrs being used as Lab Rats). And still the COVID Jabs are rolling out.

We are looking at the WHO (UN) Director General having huge powers to monitor 194 UN Nation States populations, enabled by the political bureaucrats in Wellington. Helen Clark Foundation advisory to the Govts policy making. And Ashley Bloomfield look at their history do you trust them? A Mechanism exists called ‘The Compliance Committee and Universal Peer Review Mechanism’ refers to mechanisms to restructure our domestic health systems and the allocations of our domestic health budgets around ‘Pandemic Surveillance, preparedness & response activities. Global decision making over UN Nations States eg NZ. Through these Global Health Governance, the huge powers of the Director General of the Un and the unelected  Bureaucrats, Technocrats of UN Nation  States the proposals include a stronger push globally for immunizations (lots more lab rats- human clinical trials). With more of this authorities touting of the corrupt lying of  ‘Benefits are far greater than Risks’.. do you really trust this..

We know they are lying, they know- we know they are lying- but they just keep on lying’. Do you call this transparency.. I personally call this criminal and corrupt.  March 2022 the World Health Org., (UN) requested that ALL UN Member State authorities classify, count ‘All deaths that take place within 28 days of an individual obtaining a COVID19 test are to be classified as a COVID19 Death.  A police officer shoots and kills a man in New Lynn, this is recorded as a COVID19 death. Surely this actually is a way of masking COVID19 Jab deaths and also other deaths such as Suicide.?? New Zealand has a great reputation on the global stage for being a country of Human Lab Rats. For Human Clinical Trials  there must be many different ethic groups. NZ Fits the picture and all in one basket a small populated country on the other side of the world. NZ has the advantage over other countries.

NZ is the first country to see the first light of day. NZ lacks many medical drugs and some are too expensive for many NZrs to obtain. (Therefore NZrs make good guinea-pigs). Human Clinical Trials time wise much  quicker in NZ, therefore much cheaper than other countries. The government has been putting much more funding into Research over the last few years Research in New Zealand is funded by Government Grants, Scholarships, Corporations and Private Companies, also Global and NZ Foundations, Trusts, Charities and other Institutions. In 2020 alone NZ Government spent $1 billion on research and development in several sectors.

The MPI (Govt) have an annual Research Budget of $130 million. MBIE (Govt 2021 budget in research $56.12 million. The Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) in 2020 $50 million for Research and Universities NZ  funding on top of this is unknown. On top of this is Non-Government funding for Research Agriculture research funded by Dairy NZ, Zoetis Ltd., Corporation Ltd and Meat & Wool NZ Ltd.,  of course there are others too. There are huge amounts of funding being put into Animal Free Agriculture.

University of Invercargill received funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Bill Gates lends a hand to Massey University Research into Ebola. The Global Cabal are making their mark locally…Gates Foundation funds research reports the Beehive (21/9/2020) $$27 million. (Speaker of the House is Winston Peters). He was referring to COVID19 Jabs development through global COVAX Facility. Peters said this will act as a pre-purchase of vax if successful. Winston Peters said “It’s important that all countries are able to access sufficient amounts of vaccines to protect their populations and contribute to getting the pandemic under control on a global level.

That “joining the COVAX Facility is complementary to other strands of COVID 19 Vax Strategy, which includes advance purchase arrangements with  pharmaceutical companies, investing in global research and increasing manufacturing capability” (Source Beehive Website) UN Member States are to vote on the amendments to the Health regulation and the International Pandemic Treaty behind closed doors, thus diminishing the right of Self-Determination of Democratic participation. Member States risk losing their sovereignty. WHO in two legal instruments include ‘non-questionable leadership in health matters. WHO will have mass power over ‘ Health Emergencies of Public Concern’ (Article 13 (a) )

Artic 13A A power of mass power of health emergencies of public concern ‘One Health Approach’ is every thing. Level of CO2. Permanent measures declared by the WHO. Will have the right to declare recommendations declare, impose all kinds of restrictions, experimental treatments.

Art 18 Non binding is eliminated and is now binding vaccination. Will be able to decide all information including censorship and surveillance. IHR and the new pandemic treaty. No-one can challenge the WHO whether it be govts or the people.. the imposing of the regime of experimental jabs. (A No Stop  Button) . Self declare, authorize itself a public health concern and impose it as long as they like. Surveillance of the people and of the member state. No science, no legal court proceedings, no court of justice, no scientific process- no democracy. Basic principle that we have as human beings the right to know what we consent to is diminished. IHR by definitions of WHO are qualified as Binding regulations. Originally were non-binding, this has been scrubbed out replaced with  Binding. Thus a violation of Informed Consent. Self Determination of the People.. ( referred to in UN Charter 1946.  Human Rights) not protected, no checks and balances. Benefits will always be recorded that Benefits over risks even if the risks are much greater. A dystopian dictatorship future

Article 1 of the IHR 2005 amendments reference  ‘Health Products including therapeutics, vaccines, medical devices, personal protective equipment, diagnostics, assistive products, cell and gene based therapies and their components, materials or parts.. health products that include medicines, health technologies and know how. Includes organized set or combination of knowledge, skills, health products, procedures, databases, systems developed to solve a health problem, those also related to development or manufacture of health products or their combination its application or usage ‘Health Technologies’ are interchangeably used as health care technologies will be imposed upon  by the power of WHO . What was non-binding advice is now crossed out to say Binding

A principle has been removed from the original IHR as to “full respect for the Dignity, Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Persons”. This has been replace with:-The implementation of these regulations shall be based on principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities of the States Parties, taking into consideration their social and economic development. All rubber stamped by NZ Government,.

The WHO International Health Regulation Amendments and the WHO International Pandemic Treaty (Accord) Articles 13(3) and (4) equates to the World Health Org., (UN) Director General having huge powers over UN Member States during a PHEIC.By deleting the phrase “At the request of the State party” and replacing  ‘MAY’ with ‘SHALL’ assistance offered by the WHO to a  ‘state in the response to public health risks becomes the default option.  If a state does not accept such offers for assistance within two days, it must justify this by declaring the ‘public health rationale for the rejection’ to all other WHO member states, potentially resulting in far-reaching economic and financial consequences for the rejecting state.

WHO assistance offered includes ‘Mobilization of International Assistance’, including on-site assessments, supported further by suggested amendments to Article 15(2) IHR, allowing the WHO Director-General and the Emergency Committees set up by him/her to recommend ‘the deployment of expert teams’ to states experiencing a PHEIC.   The interfering powers violating Sovereign Rights of the people of the Nation State. 300 Amendments have been proposed to the IHR (WHO). All to be concluded in the World Health Assembly gathering in May 2023

LINKS

https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-far-reaching-us-proposals-to-amend-the-international-health-regulations-at-the-upcoming-75th-world-health-assembly-a-call-for-attention/

https://www.nzavs.org.nz/how-research-is-funded  https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/27million-investment-global-vaccine-facility

Interesting facts that majority of people in NZ are unaware of. All relating to the Global Commons Alliance and the Rockefeller Philanthropy, WEF and NZ Government etc., and the ‘Global Agenda’

The Global Commons Alliance is a sponsored project of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors New York

Take-away Key Notes

1)The Global Commons Alliance is a growing coalition of scientists, philanthropies, civil society groups, businesses, innovators, enabling collective action to safeguard the global commons. The Global Commons has been described as a Socialist focus of international interest, concerning biodiversity, climate change, essential resources which may include spaces beyond national jurisdiction from a governance perspective. Reference is made to the Global Commons  referencing the ‘Tragedy Of The Commons’. Concepts shaping regulatory discourse, where common resources are over exploited because of the absence of regulation, the common heritage of mankind, which reflects the idea that some resources belong to us all, including our future generation. That we cannot be denied rights of responsibilities in relation to them

2)Since being popularized by Garret Hardin in 1968, the parable ‘Tragedy Of The Commons’ has been widely adopted to illuminate the central problems of environmental policy. This is the  tendency for public resources to be depleted, degraded, or destroyed by over-exploitation. Referencing the ‘out-growth of capitalism (free-market enterprising economy) due to environmental devastation caused by human-kind. This is a Marxist theory. The theory of the ‘Commons’ strengthening its link with Marxism, sustainable governance and Branko Horvats theory of ‘self-management in the context of Socialist Yugoslavia. Foucault’s concept of governmentality- the need for a socialist political rationale. Sustainable societies, which is a progressive global political agenda advancing a socialist governmentality.

3)Rockefeller Philanthropy leveraging the formulating of the principles of socialist governmentality that requires abandoning our reliance on indefinite growth. The Marxist theory is this indefinite economic growth seriously threatens the material base of human life. Socialism that requires ownership or control of property and natural resources. Ecological imperialism and deepening economic globalization, increasing migration worldwide, increased climate activism all part of the Socialist ‘Global Commons Alliance’ the have self interests in enabling collective action to control (safeguard?) the global commons

4)Our common cause refers to the ‘Socialist Alliance’ the Green Left, authoritative leftism. The Global Commons Alliance work with the ‘Earth Commission, scientists network to development actionable methodologies to support companies, corporations setting targets that are aligned with ‘Earths’ limits, societal sustainability goals (2030 Global Agenda (UN). To implement, collaborate with Earth HQ an international; strategic communications platform. The Global Commons Alliance and the ‘Systems Change Lab’ monitoring progress as to the worldwide transformations, to distil them so that they rapidly evolve promoting systemic change, identify critical gaps, mobilize support for coalitions as they push towards tipping point. (With Corporate engagement)

5)The ‘Earth Commission’ is convened by the ‘Future Earth’, the key authors include (UN)IPCC, the operating of space for humanity and nature by mapping planetary boundaries, interconnections between different systems (boundaries). The Rockefeller Global Commons Alliance includes a ‘Corporate Engagement’ Program of companies, consultants, industry coalitions, financial institutions that use methods, tools, guidance through Corporate Engagement. The Alliance network is to mobilize citizens (migration) companies/corporations, cities and countries to accelerate systems change.

6)Climate Initiatives Platform UN Environment Programme and the Copenhagen Climate Centre supported by UNOPS the name of this initiative is called ‘The Global Commons Alliance’ (Rockefeller Philanthropy). The business demand to set targets for the whole of the Earth System, includes a group of organizations that collaborate to form a worldwide ‘Science Based Targets Network’. The geographical coverage is described as ‘Global’. A collaborations of world leading institutions, academia, NGO’s, businesses, government, organization to transform the global economy.

7)The Global Commons Alliance has four focus areas: The Earth Commission, Science Based Targets Network, Earth HQ and Systems change (A Socialist Global Transformation – Eco-Socialism-Communist Degrowth). The 62  Non-Governmental Organizations include CDC-Biodiversity France, Future-Earth Belgium. Rockefeller Philanthropy, Deakin University Australia, the World Economic Forum, The UN Environmental Programme, Club Of Rome, Centre Of Global Commons Japan, C40 Cities,  Globaia New Zealand, Global Covenant of Mayors- these are just a few.

8)Globaia New Zealand is a participant of this global socialist agenda. Described as having exciting projects in NZ, enhancing collective planetary awareness. Work built on powerful thematic pillars. Referencing the Neolitic Revolution to the Great Acceleration and beyond as global change, transformation. The planetary stewardship of imagining, modelling, visualizing data driven pathways tto global sustainability and a regenerative future by 2100. Referring to a ‘Utopia and Idealism’. A new world view.

9)Globaia was established by Felix Pharand-Deschenes in 2009, to influence the current & future existence on Earth. Combining design, art, film, data, philosophy, geoscience. Pioneering new ways of visualizing our past, present, future. An approach that enables novel ways pf presenting complex data, ideas as to the focus on planet earth. Felic Pharand’s work has been published and used by the World Economic Forum, Leo Decaprio Foundation, the UN and the Earth Summit, Rio+20. In 2018 Felix became a member of the Edmund Hillary Fellowship

10)Another key member of Globaia is Anne-Marie Doucet. A Primary and Intermediate teacher of 15years. She has worked in Quebec, Yukon and NZ. She’s reported to inspire countless students to become environmental stewards of earth, the creating of a sustainable future. (Agenda 2030). Her role with Globaia is being responsible for new partnerships and more educative tools for sustainable development.

11)Manno Andrade Franca another member of Globaia. Manno is an expert in geospatial intelligence and business strategy. Has worked as an advicor to the govt of Brazil, where he implemented, oversaw biological corridors. He is a leaders of developing news systems , deforestation, platforms, environmental knowledge. He is a director, trustee, advisor to various cross-sector organizations in the UK, US, Switzerland, Brazil, Argentina and NZ. 2019 he became a member of the Edmund Hillary Fellowship

12)Omar Fayed another key member of Globaia has an expertise in business strategy, environmentalism. Executive Vice Chair of Harrods Group until it was sold in 2010 He is a Research Fellow at the Institute of Ecotechnics UK and US. He works in the realm of Corporate Leadership and sustainable ;living, is at the helm of EarthX a company that he co-founded, focuses on advanced data, visualization technologies. Integrating ecology with technology. He is the chair of Synergetic Press. Has a portfolio that influences commercial and ecological sectors.

13)The Advisors, key members of Globaia are referenced to policy making, societal transformation, global sustainability. Vicky Robertson is a key person noted on the globaia website as the Secretary for the Environment and CEO of NZ Ministry for the Environment. Leading the development, implementation of environmental policy since April 2015. Cited as having a very strong track record of delivering impactful solutions for Climate Change, biodiversity, water, waste, urban issues. Key achievement include leading the development of NZ’s Zero Carbon Act. The Emission Reduction Pla, the National Adaption Plan. She has advocated for local and global action to reduce greenhouse emissions.

14) Her background is in Law, economics with 8 years as Deputy Secretary at the Treasury, responsible for overseeing public finance management, tax, regulatory and competition policy. She has worked at the Ministry of Economic Development and is described as passionate about the ‘Maori World View’- diversity & inclusion. Another NZ key member of Globaia is Matthew Monahan, he is described as as having a resolute commitment to fostering social impact. In 2016 he entered the entrepreneurial world by co-establishing the Edmund Hillary Fellowship, to activate the Global Impact Visa effectively. Fostering an environmental of thinkers and visionaries towards creating an inclusive prosperous sustainable future (Agenda 2030 Global Agenda).

15)He co-founded Mangoroa Farms, being the director of the venture, driving the mission of the organization, a food hub, resilience education centre situated in Wellington. He co-founded the Biome Trust in NZ. The philanthropies entity is rooted in ecological sustainability. He also launched Ma Earth a community led movement to align economic incentives with planetary health. Referenced in Edmund Hillary Fellowship in an article ‘Crowdfunding land stewardship in Regional Aotearoa’

16)He has been described by Bloomberg as the Silicon Valley Whizz Kids that headed to the bottom of the world. Stuff NZ wrote an article on the Monahan Brothers the young, rich, silicon valley idealists who have come to change the world from NZ. They came to influence Migration Policy, and what’s in it for us stuff?  The American Monahan brothers and Yoseph Ayele, the CEO of their start-up Kiwi Connect, a networking platform for international entrepreneurs and investors., pursuing opportunities in NZ. Matthew Monahan stating “we are humbled to be invited to having a conversation with the government”

17)The genesis of a new visa and NZ Immigration Policy and Matthew Monahan, he was told NZ Govt was not happy with the visa’s and wanted to find a different way. In US they were also lobbying govt ministers. They met with Steven Joyce and Immigration Minister Michael Woodhouse. July 2015 John Key Prime Minister of NZ announced that the Govt was looking at developing a ‘Global Impact Visa’ to attract entrepreneurs with global networks. In 2017 the private partners of NZ Work Visa scheme was named as Edmund Hillary Fellowship, a new partnership between Kiwi Connect and the Hillary Institute, an international leadership charity founded by Sir Ed himself. Helen Clark is the Patron of the International Hillary Institute.

18)Stuff NZ publishes an image of; Immigration Minister Michael Woodhouse, centre, at the launch of the Edmund Hillary Fellowship in February, with EHF chief executive Yoseph Ayele and Catlin Powers, founder of a solar energy start-up and fiancee of Brian Monahan. There are other key members and advisers of Globaia all are referenced to World Economic Forum, the UN Climate Action Summit, Food and Community transformation, societal re-engineering. Designing global transformation- real world change. Sustainable and Resilient Cities. Committed to the Earth Charter. Tuariki Delemare stated “You have business policies where out of the blue suddenly comes this thing called ‘global impact visas’ where the government have decided to allow a bunch of foreigners to hand out visa’s. Global Impact Visa’s were called radical. Sir Edmund Fellowship application from 52 countries, 18 investors, 293 Entrepreneurs.

19)GLOBAIA NZ. The founder of Globaia being Felix Pharand Deschenes attended the UN Rio+20 Summit, the World Economic Forum, Davos, the Stockholm Resilience Centre, he was involved in co-leading the Rockefeller Foundation and societal transformations supporting a sustainable equitable world – digital disruptions for sustainability agenda- research, innovation and action. The digital revolution to transform society to enhance globalization to forge multistakeholder partnerships to foster global actions, to make this vision a reality. He visited NZ in 2004 as a Masters Student, referred to as creating multimedia stories to transform our relationship with Earth. Described as a citizen of Canada referring to ‘Global Impact by digital storytelling to improve our connection and understanding of planet earth

20)Felix stated envisions a world where everything is interconnected, has a strong alignment with indigenous people, and the Edmund Hillary Fellowship is an unique opportunity to integrate indigenous perspectives in Blobaia and beyond. Founder Of Globaia, references to the Un, WEF, Hillary Institute- Patron Helen Clark and NZ Global Impact Visa, NZ Government, Rockefeller Foundation. Resilient 100  Cities Rockefeller Project which includes Wellington and Christchurch Cities that joined C40 Cities, Auckland City as since spread to cities across NZ. Felix Pharand Deschenes Founder of Globaia in NZ referenced to C40, Resilient Cities, Mega Cities, Smart Cities.

21)The magical touch of Globaia. 30^th October 2017 and the World Mayors Council on Climate Change and the Climate Leadership Group (C40 Cities) The magical touch of Globaia and Felix Pharand-Deschenes. (as referenced in the Ontario Courts– Federal and public policy greenhouse gases) pdf 296 pages.  Interesting facts that majority of people in NZ are unaware of. All relating to the Global Commons Alliance and the Rockefeller Philanthropy, WEF and our govt etc.,

https://www.ehf.org/read/crowdfunding-land-stewardship-in-regional-aotearoa

https://interactives.stuff.co.nz/2017/06/the-americans/part2/

https://www.ontariocourts.ca/coa/GGPPA/files/RecordICC.pdf

https://m.facebook.com/Globaia/photos/a.177724022420707/964548810404887/?type=3&source=48&__tn__=EH-R

I am probably walking on broken glass here with this shared post however never mind I am well used to it now, and I do have my big girl nickers on, so I’ll fire away and wait for the reasponses.

My Research has led me to seeking out information in the October 2019 published documentation of guidance for Policy Makers, Ministers when considering the Treaty Of Waitangi. The Treaty Of Waitangi is one of the major sources of NZ’s Constitution) Te Tiriti o Waitangi is most relevant in New Zealand’s Constitutional Arrangements, therefore the misinterpretations, reinterpretations affect all people of New Zealand.

The Māori version of Te Tiriti o Waitangi was re-translated by Sir Hugh Kawharu, which was also a Treaty Claimant. The original Māori Version of Te Tiriti o Waitangi has deliberately been corrupted by the Judicial, Legislation and the Waitangi Tribunal. The Waitangi Tribunal has over-reaching powers to re=interpret the Treaty as they so wish and have done so, the same applies to politicians who have re-interpreted the Treaty for decision making as to policies due to the flawed corrupted guidelines in the PM- Cabinets documented guidance.

These guidelines are circulated to *All Chief Executives *All Senior Private Secretaries *All Private Secretaries *All Officials Involved In Policy Development. Below I refer to CO (19)5: Te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi Guidance circulated by the Cabinet Office to All Ministers the Issue date was 22nd October 2019. Other major sources include the Constitution Act 1986, the prerogative powers of the Queen, the State Sector Act 1988, the Electoral Act 1993, the Senior Courts Act 2016, the NZ Bill Of Rights 1990 and other relevant New Zealand, English and UK Statutes, relevant decisions of the courts and the conventions of the constitution, Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 and also Sir Hugh Kawharu’s translation of the Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Cabinet Manuel. P2)

Firstly I must add that the original version of Te Tiriti o Waitangi did not create ‘Partnership’ nor ‘Principles’ this was enacted by Statute/legislation and interpretations through the Judicial under the Labour Government in the 1980’s. When the Waitangi Tribunal was established this caused further problems as they have over time been given over-reaching powers, authority to re-interpret the Te Tiriti o Waitangi as they so wish.

Without question or further adieu the Prime Minster’s Cabinet have adopted a biased guidance for ministers to follow by way of using several interpretation that are not clearly compliant or even remotely recognizable to the original Māori version of Te Tiriti o Waitangi NZs Founding Document. (Circulated-22/10/2019). The Prime Minister-Cabinet Guidance includes the re-interpretation of what Sir Hugh Kawharu believed to be true that the Chiefs thought in 1840.

There are limits in polity on major decision making. References are made to special rights and interests of Maori and Maori autonomous Institutions having an authority, role to play within the wider constitutional and political system. Refers to two parties negotiating on decision making processes, this eludes to one of a partnership. Also the Treaty creates a basis for protecting and acknowledge Māori Rights and Interests within a shared citizenry. Surely we must now at this given time have one rule, one law for all. I am personally concerned about the ‘them and us’ situation which eludes to a 2 class citizenship in New Zealand.

What do I believe is justifiable as far as the ‘Principles’ of the original version of Te Tiriti o Waitangi? My response if that no wording of ‘Principles’ were created in the Te Tiri o Waitangi, this was created by legislation. As for ‘Partnership’, there was no ‘Partnership’ created in the Tiriti o Waitangi. Let us go back to Sir Apirana Ngata, a scholar and a member of Parliament, he was a strong advocate of Maori interests within a unified nation of New Zealand. He described the following “The Chiefs placed in the hands of the Queen of England the ‘Sovereign’ authority to make laws. (Art1) The Treaty transfers all ‘Chiefly’ authority to the Queen forever, and the embodiment of that ‘Authority’ is now the New Zealand Parliament. For that reason, all demands for absolute Maori authorities are nothing more than wishful thinking”.

In 1940 at the Centennial of the Treaty Of Waitangi he said “Let me acknowledge first that, in the whole world I doubt whether any native race has been so well treated by a European people as the Māori”. Hence from Sir Apirana Ngata’s own words its evidential that legal fiction have evolved deliberately so, because Apirana Ngata’s words clearly shows there is no ‘Partnership’ between the Crown (Govt)

The tail has certainly been wagging the dog, the Waitangi Tribunal should have no political standing, authority over legislation/ regulation or statutes of the law in New Zealand. I believe its highly questionable that the Judicial (Courts) have recognized ‘tikanga’ as part of a Māori Common Law. I am to understand that ‘Tikanga’ Maori means the right way of doing thing in Te Ao Maori. Whatever Māori see as just and correct in their Māori World view that ‘tikanga’. Lawcom.govt.nz defined Tikanga Maori as including all values, standards, principles or norms that Māori subscribe to, to determine appropriate behaviour. Lawcom also state that ‘tikanga’ Māori maybe a source of enforceable rights and interests for Māori.

Lawcom.govt.nz also states that up to 1840 references to Maori Law are ‘tapu’ (sacred prohibition) – ‘rahui’ (a form of tapu restricting access to certain food sources) – ‘utu’ (repayment for anothers actions, whether hostile or friendly and also ‘muru’ (a form of utu, usually a ruitual seizure of personal property as redress, compensation for an offence).

‘Tikanga is expressly recognized in various ways in ACTS of Parliament, therefore this surely means we do have a two class citizenship in New Zealand. I am concerned about the Veto Rights that Iwi/Maori have over others, and where the Waitangi Tribunal sits within this political scope? Here I reference the Waitangi Tribunal in ‘Te Puni Koriki Booklet’ Titled ‘The Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Expressed By The Courts and Waitangi Tribunal’

Interesting that ‘Te Puni Kokiri is the governments principal policy advisor on Maori development, Te Puni Koriki is a government department. Described by the government themselves as ‘The Crown-Maori Economic Growth Partnership’ also noted on the Government Website ‘Te Puni Koriki’s Partnership between the Crown (Govt) and Maori is a key principle in the Treaty.

Again I confirm that the original Maori version of Te Tiriti o Waitangi never created a Partnership between the Crown- the Govt and Maori.

Sir Hugh Kawharu’s re-interpretations of Te Tiriti o Waitangi are very biased in favour of the over-reaching Waitangi Tribunals authority his re-interpretated beliefs means that every claimant could seek redress (compensation) just for not being able to carry out their chieftainship. Sir Hugh Kauwharu re-interpreted the Treaty in such a way that it could give Iwi/Maori Sovereign Rights, Veto Rights over other, a two class citizenship, veto over the legislature of Parliament.

David Seymour, Winston Peters I urge you to seek open public debate on this extremely important issue that affects all New Zealand Citizens. I pray that Christopher Luxon will walk with you both on broken glass, after a while you get use to it.

The original Maori version of Te Tiriti o Waitangi is well overdue for open discussion and debate. Te Tiriti o Waitangi is New Zealand’s Founding Document that’s very important to NZ’s Constitutional Arrangement.

The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU)  pathway to Universal Health Coverage (WHO) concerns the legal or development status of any or all UN Member Nation States, territories, cities, frontiers or boundaries. Specific products of manufacturers, whether patented or not have been endorsed or recommended by the IPU or WHO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. One of the key ‘health’ targets of Agenda 2030 (UN) SDG’s is Universal Health Coverage promoting health security and equity, social inclusion, reducing inequalities, gender equality, poverty eradication, economic growth and human dignity adopted a resolution calling for parliamentarians to strategically play a substantive role in making Universal Health Care a reality for all.

The era of COVID-19 Pandemic with its severe restrictions has left a multitude of people in populations without or with very limited health coverage, which has seriously deepened  and increased vulnerabilities. UN Agencies published reports document that girls, women are especially affected. This is wrong it is young, elderly and all others including the male species (patriarchal)

The Right to Health (IPU) high level meeting on Universal Health Coverage 2019 (The role of Parliaments in ensuring the ‘right to health’ resolution adopted at the 141^st IPU Assembly. The IPU partnership with the World Health Organization supports parliamentarians without Universal Health Coverage stated Tedross Adhanom Ghebreyesus Director General of WHO  (World Health Org., UN)

The IPU and WHO produced a handbook for Parliamentarians as to National and International commitments, how parliamentarians enact legislation, review and approve budgets and also hold governments to account for non-compliancy

In explain UHC (Universal Health Coverage) this includes exploring contributions that members of parliament make to achieving UHC, focusing on their legislative role which includes developing and drafting, enacting and implementing UHC legislation, as well as their role as to UHC financing, the oversight and accountability. Also a on how  MP recommendations and how they advance UHC in their respective countries.

The Handbook is designed for those involved in enacting legislation in their State, parliaments and parliamentarians, parliamentary staff and advisers, government officials for example executive authorities such as Ministers of Health, member of civil society, communities, academics, constituency staff and any other person that chooses to advocate for or facilitate UHC.

This also included the IPU, WHO and other Multilateral Organizations that work with Parliaments on UHC, as well as other organizations and public interest groups working to accelerate UHC. The Guiding Handbook includes key takeaways and messages, recommendations, information  not all suits the same needs of every country but these ideas, recommendations can be developed or and adapted.

Agenda 2030 itself includes International Human Rights Laws (to leave no-one behind- everyone, everywhere at every age – target 3.8 of Agenda 2030). Hence the consensus achieved of all Nation States in ratifying Agenda 2030 (UN) means they are bound by this pledge to ‘leave no one behind’  The WHO and IPU state that political opportunities must be seized and PPPs must be sought. That is Public-Private Partnerships for Prosperity (Profits for Corporate Multi-stakeholderism otherwise known as ‘Social Investment’) This is to be recognized as a pledge made by all those UN Nation States that ratified UN Agenda 2030 that was adopted at the UN Assembly in 2015. UN & IPU message is to Parliamentarians worldwide “There is no perfect moment to move forward with reform: political opportunities must be seized and partnerships sought with social movements to advance the UHC global agenda to be implemented by parliamentarians in UN Member Nation States” with the absence of discrimination towards certain individuals or groups (never mind the majority of the population this applies to minority revolutionary groups not everyday citizens of New Zealand) , namely gender related and other types of inequalities.

LINK

https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/364855/9789240060388-eng.pdf?sequence=1  54 PAGES