And a Brief History of 2 Influential Globalists Good Mates Behind Agenda 21/ 2030. Transforming Our Lives Agenda 2030 (Without Your Consent) A Blue Print for Inclusive Socialism.  Socialism demands abolishing Private Property Rights.

Will your children be able to afford to buy their own home, can you afford to buy your own private Property. Look back  how it was once normal to own your own property.. buy a section- build a house.. The Pride. The children playing in gardens on swings…Life has changed drastically in NZ, and its not as if we are running out of land.

Approximately 90.5% of New Zealand’s land is natural and semi-natural vegetated land, while about 4.1% is bare land, and a very small percentage (around 0.45%) is built-up area. This means that the vast majority of the land is not built on, with over 94% classified as natural, semi-natural, or bare land, according to the latest available data.

A Brief on Global Agenda 2030- Its implementation and share some information also history of two influential figures In the original organizing of UN Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 (UN). Starting with Jacinda Ardern…

Ardern was invited as a guest speaker hosted by Bill & Melinda Gates in New York. Arranged by the WEF Goalkeepers that Gates founded. Ardern embraced Global Agenda 2030 in her speech, telling the audience that NZ was taking the lead. Had entered the UN 2030 Non binding agreement into Domestic Policy making. Ardern was President of the World Youth Internal Socialist Movement

Hence the Non-binding Agreement (Soft Law)  Implementing UN Agenda 2030 into Domestic Policy meant this became Hard Law (Legally binding). She said she was doing some that other countries had not tried that would drive system level actions. That her approach was needed on a Global Scale. Melinda Gates praised Ardern telling the audience that “Jacinda Ardern is a true International leader who understands the future of the world”

However New Zealanders were kept in the dark about all this, not one MP in Parliament opened their mouth. Not one public discussion, debate with the public of NZ. Everyone of those MPs in the House knew what was happening and still there is no public discussion – we may often see the words “by 2030” but the Transforming Our Lives By 2030 a Global Agenda for NZrs (To transform their lives without NZrs consent) Is literally controlling the lives of the population of NZ. The silence is deafening.

However, the government will discuss leaving the Paris Agreement but  do not tell you that they  have committed to Agenda 2030 (UN) which includes  the Climate Scam (SDG 13) and also linked to all the other 16 SDGs. (17 SDGs Global Development Goals)

UN Agenda 2030 -Transforming Our Lives by 2030 – Global Development Goals include  * Digital Identity for ALL (SDG Target (16.9) A digital Framework-Digital Economy. The Core Objective No-one is Left Behind. (Without Digital Identification by 2030) * Gene Technology is integral to Global Agenda 2030 (SDG3) and also supports Climate Action (SDG13).

Agenda 2030 integrates Migration into its framework including Irregular Migration (Illegal) A specific Data collection for irregular migrants – Protecting Migrants whatever Status. Regular pathways for Irregular Migrants. Global Agenda 2030- Monitoring & Surveillance is managed through a multi-layered framework involving global, national and local mechanisms

The Governments recent Intensification of Auckland City. Building higher. This concept is also addressed in UN Agenda 2030 (SDG11) Making Cities Human Settlements (Rapid Urbanization) Human Habitat 3. Inclusive and Sustainable Urbanization: Target 11.3 calls to “enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries” by 2030. (denser, more integrated development)

The New Urban Agenda, adopted at the Habitat III conference in 2016, provides detailed guidance on implementing these goals, advocating for rethinking how we build and manage cities. A function will be central to achieving the entire 2030 Agenda.   Reducing reliance on private vehicles. Access to Green Public Spaces (Target 11.7): Integrated planning within intensified urban areas . Walking and Cycling (SDG3)

Across NZ Government- All Political Parties- behind closed doors. Transforming New Zealanders Lives by 2030 without your consent. The Blueprint for Modern Socialism. The Godfather behind the initial influencing of this is Maurice Strong known as the shadow behind 2 Secretary Generals. Oil and Mineral Entrepreneur. Known as the Godfather of the environmental climate activism movements worldwide. Organizer of the UN Human Development and Environmental world gatherings since the Stockholm Conference in 1972. Very influential on the world stage.

Maurice Strong  self declared Socialist…Close friend of Klaus Schwab both were Co Chairs in High Level Meeting ‘ The Sustainable Development Advisory Group (UN). Maurice Strong  mentored Klaus Schwab for several years. Strong leverage the WEF up to where it is now. Both were members of the Brundtland Commission and Strong was the first Executive Director of the UNEP (Environment Programme)

Maurice Strong served on the WEF Foundation Board. He was described as a ‘great friend’ and an ‘indispensable advisor’ to Klaus Schwab. Influenced WEF Agendas on SDG (Agenda 2030 and Climate Change)

When Maurice Strong died in 2015 Klaus Schwab posted an appreciation of his good friend and advisor. ‘Strong was a frequent attendee and speaker at the annual WEF meeting in Davos, where he advocated for sustainable development and global environmental governance. His vision and guidance were credited by Schwab with helping the Forum achieve its significance’

UN Agenda 21 originate from Maurice  Strongs UN Gathering eg The first Earth Summit in 1972 and beyond to Agenda 21 (UN) 1992. Which then led to Global Agenda 2030. Based on Humans are destroying the Planet. Hence mechanisms to control our lives. Was described as ‘Meeting the needs of the present without compromising those of future generations. The Blue Print For Socialism.  Implemented into NZ Domestic Policy Making. Legally Binding. Transforming Our Lives 2030. Anti Western Belief’s ..Values.. Anti Christian- Antisemitism- Anti Colonialism

RUMBLE 4^TH NOV 2025 VIDEO LINK

 BLUEPRINT FOR SOCIALISM IN NZ ‘TRANSFORMING OUR LIVES 2030’

A Brief History of 2 Influential Globalists Good Mates Behind Agenda 21/ 2030. Transforming Our Lives Agenda 2030 (Without Your Consent) A Blue Print for Inclusive Socialism. Socialism demands abolishing Private Property Rights.

 WakeUpNZ
RESEARCHER.. Cassie

https://rumble.com/v7176na-a-blueprint-for-socialism-in-nz-transforming-our-lives-2030.html

Viewing time 12 minutes.

WakeUpNZ’

RESEARCHER: Cassie

INTERIM UPDATE JULY 2024- PAGE 125

SPECIAL POWERS TO USE FORCE ON LAW ABIDING CITIZENS OF NEW ZEALAND

SPECIAL POWERS: Special powers are authorized by the Minister of Health or by an Epidemic Notice – these apply where an emergency has been declared under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act

THE POWER TO DETAIN: The power to detain, isolate, quarantined – allows a medical officer of health to ‘require persons’, places, buildings, ships, vehicles, aircraft, animals or things to be isolated, quarantined or disinfected (Section 70 (1)(f) Can enter your property without a Warrant.

THE POWER TO PRESCRIBE PREVENTIVE TREATMENT: Allows a Medical Officer of Health, in respect of any person who has been isolated or quarantined, to require people to remain where they are isolated, quarantined until they have been medically examined and found to be free from infectious disease, and until they have undergone such preventive treatment as the Medical Officer of Health as prescribed.

THE USE OF FORCE: Section 71A states that a member of the Police may do anything reasonable necessary (including the use of force) to help a Medical Officer of Health or any person authorized by the Medical Officer of Health in the exercise or performance of powers or functions under Sections 70 or 71

THE ONE HEALTH APPROACH: Has already been implemented, this is described as :- Humans, Animals- Wild and Domestic, Oceans, River waterways, soil, plants, tree’s, the whole world’s Eco-System is inter-connected. This is namely an ‘Earth System Governance’. A Global Environmental governance in times of turbulence to  create vast complex societies- globalized economies..corporate capture. (Earth systems are deeply connected)

THE MOBILIZING OF AN EARTH GOVERNANCE ALLIANCE: . This is at the forefront of moving towards the sustainable (Socialist Blueprint) global strategy the global transformation to leave no-one behind. Everyone, everywhere – at every age.

RESPONDING TO FUTURE PANDEMICS: The New Zealand Pandemic Plan sets out the health system strategy and framework for actions for preparing for and responding to future pandemics. It can be adopted and applied (with adaptations as necessary) to any pandemic event. It sets out the health system strategy and framework for actions in preparing for and responding to future pandemics. While the plan is focused on respiratory pathogens, such as influenza and COVID-19, it can be adopted and applied (with adaptations as necessary) to any pandemic, regardless of the nature of the pathogen and its severity. NOTE: REGARDLESS OF THE NATURE OF THE PATHOGEN AND ITS SEVERITY

A DEMOCRACY WITHOUT BORDERS: A Mega new campaign aims at strengthening the ‘Global Environmental Governance’ (The Global Order)  A meeting was held in Geneva on the March 26^th 2024 as to  Mobilizing an Earth Governance Alliance (MEGA) will serve as a platform to build a coalition of civil society organizations and like-minded states, along with legislators, experts, business actors and other stakeholders, who intend to work together in this field and amplify relevant initiatives. Climate Governance. MEGA Platforms. UN Member States at the Decision making table

Researcher Cassie

WakeUpNZ

1^st JUNE 2024 THE WORLD HEALTH ASSEMBLY AN AGREEMENT WAS REACHED ON WIDE RANGING, DECISIVE PACKAGE OF AMENDMENTS TO IMPROVE THE IHR 2005.. INTERNATIONAL HEALTH REGULATIONS 2005 (Source of Information WHA -News release: Geneva, Switzerland). And the setting of a date for the finalizing negotiations on a Proposed WHO International Pandemic Treaty (Accord)

The annual meeting of its 194 countries on the 1^st June 2024 agreed to a package of critical amendments to the International Health Regulation (IHR 2005), making concrete commitments to completing negotiations on a global International WHO Pandemic Treaty (Accord) agreement within a year at the very latest. They report this is “in order to ensure comprehensive, robust systems are in place in ALL countries to protect the health & safety of ALL people everywhere- from the risk of future outbreaks and pandemics. (Outbreaks can in climate mandates etc.,)  As embedded in this decision making in the One Health Approach.

The interdependency od Humans-Animals Wild and Domestic, Tree’s Plants Soil., Insects, Air Oceans etc., the whole Ecosystem. Therefore a cockroach is of the same value as a Human Being. In other words your individual freedom, Human Rights mean Diddly Squat.  And 194 countries agreed to this package of critical robust amendments. In an historic development, the World Health Assembly, the annual meeting of its 194 member countries, today agreed a package of critical amendments to the International

These decisions represent two important steps by countries, taken in tandem with one another on the final day of the Seventy-seventh World Health Assembly, to build on lessons learned from several global health emergencies, including the COVID-19 pandemic. The package of amendments to the Regulations will strengthen global preparedness, surveillance and responses to public health emergencies, including pandemics.

The historic decisions taken today demonstrate a common desire by Member States to protect their own people, and the world’s, from the shared risk of public health emergencies and future pandemics,” said Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General. “The amendments to the International Health Regulations will bolster countries’ ability to detect and respond to future outbreaks and pandemics by strengthening their own national capacities, and coordination between fellow States, on disease surveillance, information sharing and response. This is built on commitment to equity, an understanding that health threats do not recognize national borders, and that preparedness is a collective endeavor.”

Dr Tedros added: The decision to conclude the Pandemic Agreement within the next year demonstrates how strongly and urgently countries want it, because the next pandemic is a matter of when, not if. Today’s strengthening of the IHR provides powerful momentum to complete the Pandemic Agreement, which, once finalized, can help to prevent a repeat of the devastation to health, societies and economies caused by COVID-19.                                   The new amendments to the IHR include:

• introducing a definition of a pandemic emergency to trigger more effective international collaboration in response to events that are at risk of becoming, or have become, a pandemic. The pandemic emergency definition represents a higher level of alarm that builds on the existing mechanisms of the IHR, including the determination of  public health emergency of international concern. According to the definition, a pandemic emergency is a communicable disease that has, or is at high risk of having, wide geographical spread to and within multiple States, exceeds or is at high risk of exceeding the capacity of health systems to respond in those States; causes, or is at high risk of causing, substantial social and/or economic disruption, including disruption to international traffic and trade; and requires rapid, equitable and enhanced coordinated international action, with whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches;
•  
• a commitment to solidarity and equity on strengthening access to medical products and financing. This includes establishing a Coordinating Financial Mechanism to support identification of, and access to, financing required to “equitably address the needs and priorities of developing countries, including for developing, strengthening and maintaining core capacities,” and other pandemic emergency prevention, preparedness and response-related capacities;
• establishment of the States Parties Committee to facilitate the effective implementation of the amended Regulations. The Committee will promote and support cooperation among States Parties for the effective implementation of the IHR; and
• creation of National IHR Authorities to improve coordination of implementation of the Regulations within and among countries.

“The experience of epidemics and pandemics, from Ebola and Zika to COVID-19 and mpox, showed us where we needed better public health surveillance, response and preparedness mechanisms around the world,” said Dr Ashley Bloomfield of New Zealand, Co-Chair of the Working Group on Amendments to the IHR (WGIHR), and of the Drafting Group that guided the negotiations of the package of amendments during the WHA. “Countries knew what had to be done and we did it. I am so proud to be a part of this.”

Fellow WGIHR Co-Chair Dr Abdullah Assiri, of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, added: “The amendments to the International Health Regulations strengthen mechanisms for our collective protections and preparedness against outbreak and pandemic emergency risks. Today’s powerful show of global support for stronger Regulations also provide a great boost for the process to negotiate a much-needed international Pandemic Agreement.”

Countries agreed to continue negotiating the proposed Pandemic Agreement to improve international coordination, collaboration and equity to prevent, prepare for and respond to future pandemics.  WHO’s Member States decided to extend the mandate of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body, established in December 2021, to finish its work to negotiate a Pandemic Agreement within a year, by the World Health Assembly in 2025, or earlier if possible at a special session of the Health Assembly in 2024.

“There was a clear consensus amongst all Member States on the need for a further instrument to help the world better fight a full-blown pandemic,” said Ms Precious Matsoso of South Africa, Co-Chair of both the Pandemic Accord Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) and the Drafting Group on the INB and IHR agenda items at the WHA.  Fellow INB Co-Chair Roland Driece, from the Netherlands, said: “Today’s great result in approving amendments to the International Health Regulations will provide the momentum we need to finalize the Pandemic Agreement. We clearly have the will, the purpose and now the time needed to complete this generational agreement.”

Notes to editors: The IHR (2005), the successors of the 1951 International Sanitary Regulations, were conceived to maximize collective efforts to manage public health events while at the same time minimizing their disruption to travel and trade. They have 196 States Parties, comprising all 194 WHO Member States plus Liechtenstein and the Holy See.

WHO Member States launched the process to develop the world’s first pandemic accord, to prevent a repeat of the global health, economic and social impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, at a Special Session of the World Health Assembly in December 2021.

https://www.who.int/news/item/01-06-2024-world-health-assembly-agreement-reached-on-wide-ranging–decisive-package-of-amendments-to-improve-the-international-health-regulations–and-sets-date-for-finalizing-negotiations-on-a-proposed-pandemic-agreement?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR1lslyBpqAQ110GLKHEqUDrnT4xs5NOtS_RPkC6YD8XLrF9Es2xfXLXm3M_aem_AWhvUOejT_KTzGYDR0VBd5AZhKAwh_8–qKDVIqzNxB4KHIPhzF_wREwknpfbeftAKHZYg6UNk8FACEBfOHktSDg

A new agreement with the World Economic Forum gives multinational corporations influence over matters of global governance.

Harris Gleckman

Anew corporate and government marriage quietly took place last week when the leadership of the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the United Nations (UN) signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to partner with each other. While this MOU is proudly displayed on the WEF website, it is nowhere to be found on the UN website. The only indication on the UN website of this important new development is a picture of the pen used to sign the agreement, and two pictures of the signing ceremony.

One reason for this difference is that the UN’s corporate-centered Global Compact has received a good deal of bad press. Now the new WEF-UN agreement creates a second special place for multinational corporations inside the UN. There is no similar institutional homes in the UN system for civil society, for academics, for religious leaders, or for youth. It is hard to imagine a national government signing a similar formal partnership with one of its business organizations.

At the same time, the UN is under pressure from Donald Trump who wants to deconstruct the whole multilateral system. For Trump, dismantling the international system built after World War II is a companion piece to his domestic effort at deconstructing the administrative state. For the Secretary-General of the UN, the pact with the WEF may well be his effort to find new power actors who can support the current system, which is now celebrating its 75th anniversary, in the face of Trump’s onslaught.

On the other side, the WEF recently received significant public criticism after giving Hungarian Prime Minister Orban and Brazilian President Bolsonaro a warm welcome at its 2019 Davos gathering. This marriage may be seen as a way for the WEF to re-establish itself as part of the global governance center.

The timing and managing of public perceptions are not the only interesting aspect of this arrangement. In 2009, the WEF published a 600 page report entitled the Global Redesign Initiative, which called for a new system of global governing, one in which the decisions of governments could be made secondary to multistakeholder led initiatives in which corporations would play a defining role. In a sense this WEF study recommended a sort of public-private United “Nations” – something that has now been formalized in this MOU. The agreement announces new multistakeholder partnerships to deliver public goods in the fields of education, women, financing, climate change, and health.

The rather detailed MOU includes forms of cross organizational engagement up and down the UN structure. The MOU contains commitments that the Secretary-General himself will be invited to deliver a keynote address at the WEF annual Davos gatherings. His senior staff and the heads of the UN programmes, funds, and agencies will also be invited to participate in regional level meetings hosted by the WEF. It also contains a promise that the UN’s individual country representatives will explore ways to work with WEF’s national Forum Hubs. Aware of the mutual importance of public legitimacy each institution can provide for the other, the MOU also contains an agreement to cross-publicize their joint activities.

Besides the institutional blessing of the United Nations, what does the WEF get from the MOU? The scope of each of the five fields for joint attention is narrowed down from the intergovernmentally negotiated and agreed set of goals to one with more in line with the business interests of WEF members. So under financing, the MOU calls only for ‘build[ing] a shared understanding of sustainable investing’ but not for reducing banking induced instabilities and tax avoidance.

Under climate change, it calls for ‘ …public commitments from the private sector to reach carbon neutrality by 2050’, not actions that result in carbon neutrality by 2030 . Under education, it re-defines the Sustainable Development education goal to ‘ensure inclusive and equitable quality education’ into one that focuses on education to meet the ‘rapidly changing world of work.’ The MOU explicitly restricts the WEF from making financial contributions to the UN, which might have ameliorated the economic impact of some of Trump’s threat to the budgets of the UN system. At the same time, it avoids any commitment to reduce global inequality, to make energy affordable, to hold multinational corporations accountable for human rights violations, or even to rein in the behavior of the WEF’s firms that act inconsistently to the re-defined goals set out in the agreement.

All this joint work might have some practical good if it were not for three crucial elements: firstly, the agreement circumvents the intergovernmental review process; secondly, the agreement elevates multistakeholderism as the solution to the problems with the current multilateral system; and thirdly the proposed multistakeholder partnerships are not governed by any formal democratic system. Were the Secretary-General convinced of the wisdom of a UN marriage with the WEF, he could have submitted the draft MOU for approval by the member states. Instead, the Secretary-General joined the WEF in declaring in effect that multistakeholder groups without any formal intergovernmental oversight are a better governance system than a one-country-one-vote system.

All multistakeholder governance groups are largely composed of a self-selected group of multinational corporations and those organizations and individuals that they want to work with. They work without any common internal rule book to protect the views of all who might be impacted by the group. Participation in multistakeholder group is a voluntary undertaking. The drop-in-drop-out arrangements are antithetical to the UN’s efforts for 75 years to build a stable secure global governance system with a clear understanding of obligations, responsibilities and liabilities.

What is surprising is that by accepting this marriage arrangement with the WEF, the Secretary-General of the UN is marginalizing the intergovernmental system in order to ‘save’ it.

Open Democracy 2^nd July 2019

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/oureconomy/how-united-nations-quietly-being-turned-public-private-partnership/?source=in-article-related-story