Leslyn Lewis questions Canada's pandemic response and 'One Health' approach

The outspoken Conservative MP is demanding a comprehensive review of Canada's pandemic response, fiercely questioning its handling of COVID-19, its definition of a pandemic, and how the implementation of the "One Health" approach aligns with ambiguous global health criteria, raising alarms about prioritizing international agendas at the expense of Canada’s national interests.

In a pointed question to the federal government, Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis is demanding answers about Canada's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and its commitment to the “One Health” approach, a concept supported by the World Health Organization (WHO) that claims to address health challenges across human, animal and environmental sectors.

Lewis is seeking a comprehensive review of Canada's pandemic response, asking if the government has formally assessed its COVID-19 strategy and if not, when Canadians can expect such a review.

Lewis also inquires about the government's definition of a pandemic and what “One Health” means in its view. She presses further, questioning how the government plans to align with the WHO's proposed amendments to international health regulations and a new pandemic treaty. She also wants to know how Canada's emission reduction targets factor into the “One Health” approach, in an attempt to highlight the intersection between health, climate and environmental policies.

In response, the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), led by Dr. Theresa Tam, pointed to several reports, including the “Public Health Agency of Canada’s COVID-19 Response: Lessons Learned.” Worth noting, the full details of the report are only available to the public only upon request.

PHAC claims that the protection of Canadians’ health remains the government’s top priority, recognizing the revitalization of pandemic preparedness plans like the Canadian Pandemic Influenza Preparedness document. However, the government's pandemic response has been widely criticized for its lack of transparency and for ignoring established plans and procedures in favour of reactive, knee-jerk and inconsistent measures.

Indeed, the response was driven by political pressure rather than sound public health data or evidence-based advice. From the arbitrary implementation of lockdowns to the fluctuating advice on mask-wearing, border closures, and vaccine passports, the government's actions were marked by confusion, inconsistency and hysteria.

Moreover, the use of high-cycle PCR tests for asymptomatic individuals and a delay in providing effective treatments caused additional harm, leading to public frustration and a growing sense of distrust in government decisions.

PHAC’s vague response about pandemic definitions also raised concerns. The agency admits it lacks a clear definition of a pandemic, instead relying on the WHO's controversial criteria, which are filled with subjective terms like “high risk” and “substantial disruption.” These terms leave the door open for interpretation, allowing for decisions to be made on an unclear and flexible basis.

Furthermore, the government’s support for the “One Health” approach remains theoretical, with little concrete detail about its implementation. While the government claims to be coordinating efforts across various sectors, the language of collaboration and coordination sounds more like political jargon and public relations messaging than a clear plan of action. The emphasis on abstract concepts such as “global health security” and “disease X” — an undefined potential future pandemic threat — raises suspicions that resources could be misallocated, leaving real, present health needs unaddressed.

If PHAC relies on the globalist entities of the WHO to define pandemics and subsequent responses, how does the government work to ensure national interests are upheld first?

Is the Canadian government truly acting in the best interests of its citizens, or is it prioritizing global health agendas influenced by corporate and pharmaceutical interests?

As global health initiatives evolve, it remains unclear whether Canada's health policies will serve the needs of Canadians or simply align with the priorities of global elites, further eroding democratic accountability and the public's trust in its health institutions.

PETITION: No Pandemic Treaty

31,182 signatures
Goal: 50,000 signatures

The UN’s World Health Organization is trying to make governments follow its rules on responding to pandemics. Sovereign countries must be able to make decisions based on what is good for their own citizens, with their own evidence-based response plans, not for the private-interests of the WHO. We, the undersigned, demand our leaders not enter into the WHO pandemic treaty or approve changes to the existing international health regulations.

Will you sign?

Please donate here to help us expose the WHO!

Ezra Levant and Rebel News’ head of production Efrain Monsanto travelled to Geneva, Switzerland to get answers about the World Health Organization's new international health regulations and proposed pandemic treaty — since the public doesn’t seem to be getting the full story from the government or corporate media. If you think that’s valuable journalism — that we have to stay vigilant — then please chip in here to help cover the cost of their economy class airfare, shared Airbnb, taxis and meals while they were on the road. (Thanks!)

Amount
$

Tamara Ugolini

Senior Editor

Tamara Ugolini is an informed choice advocate turned journalist whose journey into motherhood sparked her passion for parental rights and the importance of true informed consent. She critically examines the shortcomings of "Big Policy" and its impact on individuals, while challenging mainstream narratives to empower others in their decision-making.

COMMENTS

Showing 2 Comments

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Lynne Osborne
    commented 2024-11-24 12:59:35 -0500
    Flying back from Europe a few weeks ago it was obvious that a disease or virus like CoVid that crops up in one part of the world would be in North America within a day or two given what protocols we went through. None that is. The latest outbreak of so called “Monkey Pox” in Manitoba is an example of how quickly diseases spread on the back of modern transportation. Ottawa seeing a threat could have asked all folks coming from a problem area show proof of vacination or immunity before entering the country but they did not. One gets the impression that since the fight against CoVid was so successful for Ottawa (people of Canada not so much) that our fearless leaders are looking for yet more opportunities to shut down the country, suspend all democratic rights, and spend billions. Note this year, after all the CoVid impacts, a 2024 vaccine was not ready by the time the flu season struck this fall. My wife and I just spent three weeks recovering from CoVid. CoVid vaccines are manufactured in Calgary by the way, but those vaccines are only sold mostly in India? I don’t believe the manufacturing facility started in Montreal back when CoVid originally got going has produced a drop of vaccine to date?
  • Bruce Atchison
    commented 2024-11-21 19:46:25 -0500
    I’m so tired of the continuing denial of the government that they bungled the “pandemic” response. The WHO and China lied so people died.