Thank you.These amendments are a clear warning. We must exit, and switch from the who to the World Council For Health. We must never have restrictions on our freedoms ever again.
It says everything that there were fewer MPs in attendance than those sitting in the public gallery. My own MP Steve Baker (who was not present) seems to think that there's no possibility of the government taking up the WHO offer. I sincerely hope he's right but I very much fear he's wrong.
It's not about 'taking up the offer'. This is where your MP lacks knowledge of what is going on. The Government has to "reject" the changes, in writing before they come into effect. In simpler terms, it's like your car insurance renewal, if you don't let them know you won't be renewing, they automatically renew it. The Government has to reject it.
I wonder if it's the same fobbing off standard letter that 2 of us got in a Lancashire constituency. What worries me is that the Minister who responded, seemed to think that negotiations "would" take place at the end of the time frame and not sooner, when we still have time to reject them. Why don't they liaise with experts, James Roguski, Dr Lawrie and the lawyer mentioned, who I'm sure would give their advice for free! I'm dubious that anyone in government is actually really looking at the amendments.
@@johnlister8145Well : in that sense he is right then.They will not take up any offer,but neither will they object the changes.Aren't semantics great ?
