Canadians may not have noticed, but on Friday, September 19 — their government quietly surrendered a little more of their country's sovereignty to the UN. (Don’t blame yourself; I have found no reference to it in the mainstream media.)We however commented on the lead up to it, last year..HANNAFORD: How much control do Canadians really want to give the UN?.Here however, is how the World Health Organization (WHO) — an agency of the UN — announced its revised International Health Regulations (IHR). "Today marks a milestone in global health governance as the amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) enter into force. This reflects a renewed global commitment to cooperation in the face of public health emergencies, shaped by hard-earned lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic."They think it’s a big deal. And they’re right.Of course, the WHO has always been able to decide when there’s a health emergency. But it was up to individual countries what they did about it. Countries that embrace this new agreement however, now delegate this discretion to international bureaucrats and agree to follow the WHO’s ‘temporary recommendations’ for at least three months. They also leave it to the WHO to define what the threat is. It could be a new COVID-style crisis; but, it could also be something determined by ... let's see ... an expansive definition of a crisis? As determined by the WHO?The United States said no. They understood the danger. Ten other countries joined it. But Canada signed..Ottawa should have gone with the US, for three reasons.First, sovereignty. Canada has just agreed that the WHO will decide when a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern” exists, and that we will then align our response with WHO’s determinations. That means border controls, vaccine approvals, quarantine measures, even the movement of ships and aircraft — all must be justified to Geneva.Second, the definition of an “emergency.” The revised IHR allows the WHO to trigger its powers not only for pandemics, but for any event that might affect “health.” This is the 'expansive' definition that could mean climate change, misinformation, or almost anything the Director-General deems to have health consequences. With such an elastic definition, Canadians could find themselves bound to foreign directives on matters far beyond disease control.Third, Canada’s own institutions are likely to over-comply. Our government has a track record of anticipating international directives and treating them as binding long before they are formally ratified. Courts, too, have shown a willingness to cite international commitments as though they were part of Canadian law, even when Parliament has not debated them. The danger is that Canadians will find themselves governed by Geneva’s preferences in advance of any real democratic process at home..Why did the United States refuse to sign? Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy stated, “The proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations open the door to the kind of narrative management, propaganda, and censorship that we saw during the COVID pandemic.”Quite. He went on to say that the US can “cooperate with other nations without jeopardizing our civil liberties, without undermining our Constitution, and without ceding away America’s treasured sovereignty.”It is a position that would have been worthy of Canada. Cooperation with the WHO remains possible, but without surrendering ultimate authority.Some will say the damage is done. Fortunately, it is not irreversible. Exiting the revised IHR is difficult, but possible. The regulations contain a mechanism for withdrawal: a government may give notice and, after a set period, free itself of the obligation.For now however, Canada has — by embracing the revised IHR — subordinated itself to an international bureaucracy with whatever sweeping definition of “health emergency” it may contrive and no accountability to Canadian voters. Worse, our own officials and judges will be eager to enforce Geneva’s preferences even before the ink is dry.The United States showed the better path. It kept faith with its constitution and its people. Canada must one day do the same. There is a way out of this spider’s web of regulation, and the next government with courage and principle, must take it.
