Britain has just weeks to decide whether to opt out of new powers that would allow the World Health Organisation to recommend imposing lockdowns in future pandemics.
The deadline of July 19 looms for the UK to reject the WHO’s new international health regulations (IHRs) – which critics argue could undermine national sovereignty.
A group of 14 leading MPs and peers has warned the Government to exercise Britain’s right to ignore amendments to the regulations before time runs out.
The IHRs were developed by WHO member states following the Covid pandemic and increase the organisation’s powers to coordinate future global responses to health emergencies.
Labour has been urged to exercise Britain’s right to ignore amendments to the regulations before time runs out
REUTERS
Critics have warned the regulations give too much power to the WHO and risk undermining individual countries’ right to manage their own affairs.
The regulations state WHO member states must “support WHO-coordinated response activities”, which some argue could amount to an obligation to support lockdown recommendations in a future pandemic.
In their letter to the Foreign Office, the parliamentarians warn it would be “premature and pre-emptive” for the UK to agree to new pandemic-related regulations before the conclusion of the Covid Inquiry.
They also argue that “serious doubts” have been raised about the legality of the WHO’s process for updating the IHRs, warning the package could “amount to a breach of international law”.
Meanwhile, ex-Home Secretary Suella Braverman has warned that the regulations “present the most serious threat to national sovereignty in a generation”.
LATEST ON LOCKDOWNS:
Suella Braverman has warned that the regulations ‘present the most serious threat to national sovereignty in a generation’
PA
Writing in The Telegraph, she said: “What the British public sees – what they intuit – is not just bureaucratic overreach but a creeping usurpation of their democratic rights.”
A WHO spokesman responded that the body “does not have the right or ability to take any decision concerning health within a sovereign state,” and vowed that authority “will and always remain with the countries themselves”.
The letter’s signatories include Tory MPs Danny Kruger, Sir Iain Duncan Smith and Esther McVey, alongside Labour’s Graham Stringer, as well as Lord Frost, the former Brexit negotiator.
The US has already opted out of the IHRs by withdrawing completely from the WHO in the early days of Donald Trump’s second administration.
MORE ON THE WHO:
Donald Trump has already opted out of the IHRs by withdrawing completely from the WHO
REUTERS
The letter noted that Trump’s executive order cited “serious concerns” about the WHO’s performance during the pandemic and “its inability to demonstrate independence from inappropriate political influence”.
The letter was organised by UsForThem, a campaign group which protested against school closures during the pandemic.
Molly Kingsley, the group’s founder, said: “Without the US, the WHO can no longer claim to be a globally representative health organisation.
“For the UK to further tie itself to the organisation at just the moment the US chooses to depart is unnecessary, misguided and short-sighted.”
