Watch the replay of the Friday Night Zoom with Alex’s presentation HERE.

Thank you to CanuckLaw.ca for the extensive research shared below.

Since the sheer volume of this will be overwhelming to most viewers, here are some notes to help people out. This didn’t just happen in 2020, but dates back generations.

Why this may help: many people here have ongoing court cases. Knowing that:

(a) WHO has been given (pretend) legal power over public health;

(b) The Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) is PHAC not a government agency it is a private entity;

(c) 2005 Quarantine Act wasn’t written by Canadians, but by WHO; and

(d) Provincial Health Acts weren’t written by Canadians

Hopefully, some of you will be able to use “ultra vires” as an argument or defence. The constitution doesn’t have a section that allows foreign groups to write laws in this country.

At least consider this as an option.

LINKS TO ARTICLES WITH BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Background content from Canuck Law regarding PHAC/WHO/IHR and the web that’s been constructed over the years. It’s a deep dive, but important to understanding how things are connected together.

WHO Constitution in 1946: Canada signs on to the WHO Constitution, a provision within states that adopting this document is a requirement to being a member. This was nearly 100 years

ago that this was adopted.

https://canucklaw.ca/world-health-organization-constitution-have-you-actually-read-it/

Int'l Pandemic Treaty a red herring: Why the high profile “amendments” to the International Health Regulations are largely irrelevant. The short answer is that countries are already bound to their dictates. Yes, this just makes it more of a formality

https://canucklaw.ca/who-constitution-why-the-global-pandemic-treaty-is-largely-irrelevant/

IHR are legally binding: The International Health Regulations aren’t just “recommendations” as many might think. Member-states are legally required to implement these rules, although it’s unclear how disobedience might be punished in practice.

https://canucklaw.ca/who-legally-binding-international-health-regulations-ihr/

2005 Quarantine Act is 3rd Ed WHO-IHR: Bill C-12 was introduced in the House of Commons in late 2004. “Supposedly”, this was in response to SARS a few years earlier. While the explanations sounded benevolent, the reality is that it laid the path for a lot of the martial law measures that happened 2020-2023. It was also explicitly admitted during the hearings that the QA was designed in anticipation of new changes to WHO=IHR. (The 3rd Edition IHR eventually came out in 2005)

https://canucklaw.ca/the-2005-quarantine-act-bill-c-12-was-actually-written-by-who/

PHAC created at instigation of WHO: The Public Health Agency of Canada was created out of nothing in June 2004, at the instigation of the WHO. The 133rd Session took place in January

2004, and required member-states to “develop a focal point” to respond to future health crises. That turned out to be PHAC. Several Orders-In-Council later, and it was embedded with other legislation. Once Harper took power in early 2006, he introduced the “PHAC Act, to give the new agency its own powers.

https://canucklaw.ca/public-health-agency-of-canada-created-as-branch-of-who/

Health Canada pop'n control: PHAC isn’t the only problem that we’ve have to deal with. Health Canada (formerly the Department of Health) was created by Bill 37 back in 1919. The supposed reason was public health after WWI. HC has undergone transformations over the years, and a

lot of its old functions are now covered by PHAC.

https://canucklaw.ca/health-canada-initially-created-for-population-control-measures/

Provincial Health Acts are QA derivatives: a quick look through shows that they are written almost identically. They were all put in around 2007-2010, following the passage of the 2005 Quarantine Act. Political parties aside, they serve the same masters.

1st article: BC, AB, SK, MB, ON 2nd article: QC, NS, NB, PEI, NFLD

https://canucklaw.ca/provincial-health-acts-are-really-just-who-ihr-domestically-implemented/ https://canucklaw.ca/the-other-provincial-health-acts-written-by-who-ihr/

This was slipped into a Budget Bill, Bill C-97, back in 2019. It removes the requirement for parliamentary consultations when invoking Quarantine Act, of Human Pathogens and Toxins Act. Considering the timing, it’s hard to argue this wasn’t pre-planned.

https://canucklaw.ca/oversight-for-human-pathogens-and-toxins

This hasn’t been updated in a long time, but the WHO-IHR statements are essentially guidelines for national and regional politicians to follow

https://canucklaw.ca/canadas-actions-were-dictated-by-whos-legally-binding-international- health-regulations/

TIMELINE FOR QUARANTINE ACT, PHAC ACT

• Jan 23, 2004 – WHO decides to update IHR

• 2004 to 2005 – WHO begins process of creating IHR 3rd Edition

• Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1068, amend Financial Administration Act

• Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1070, amend PS Staff Relations Act

• Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1071, amend Public Service Employment Act

• Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1072/1073, amend Privacy Act

• Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1074/1075, amend Access To Info Act

• Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1076, amend CSIS Act

• Sept 23, 2004 – OIC 2004-1076, amend Auditor General Act

• Oct 8, 2004 – 1st Reading of Quarantine Act

• Oct 26, 2004 – 2nd Reading of Quarantine Act

• Oct 28, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act

• Nov 4 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act

• Nov 18, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act

• Nov 23, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act

• Nov 25, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act

• Dec 7, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act

• Dec 7, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act

• Dec 8, 2004 – Parliamentary Hearing of Quarantine Act

• Feb 10, 2005 – 3rd Reading of Quarantine Act

• Feb 10, 2005 – 1st Reading of Quarantine Act (Senate)

• Mar 9, 2005 – 2nd Reading of Quarantine Act (Senate)

• Apr 14, 2005 – 3rd Reading of Quarantine Act (Senate)

• May 13, 2005 – Royal Assent of Quarantine Act

• May 8, 2006 – 2nd Reading of PHAC Act Passed in HoC

• May 11, 2006 – Parliamentary Hearing on PHAC Act

• May 16, 2006 – Parliamentary Hearing on PHAC Act

• June 20, 2006 – 3rd Reading of PHAC Act Passed in HoC

• June 20, 2006 – 1st Reading of PHAC Act (Senate)

• June 28, 2006 – 2nd Reading of PHAC Act (Senate)

• Nov 3, 2006 – 3rd Reading of PHAC Act (Senate)

• Dec 12, 2006 – Royal Assent of PHAC Act

• Dec 15, 2006 – OIC 2006-1587, PHAC Act Active

These are some of the major dates to know

HEALTH CANADA/DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, AND EARLIER “PUBLIC HEALTH”

• 1837: William White publishes book — Evils Of Quarantine Laws

• 1851: First International Sanitary Conference, Paris

• 1859: Second International Sanitary Conference, Paris

• 1866: Third International Sanitary Conference, Constantinople

• 1874: Fourth International Sanitary Conference, Vienna

• 1881: Fifth International Sanitary Conference, Washington

• 1885: Sixth International Sanitary Conference, Rome

• 1892: Seventh International Sanitary Conference, Venice

• 1983: Eighth International Sanitary Conference, Dresden

• 1894: Ninth International Sanitary Conference, Paris

• 1897: Tenth International Sanitary Conference, Venice

• 1903: Eleventh International Sanitary Conference : Paris, 1903

• 1906: Revised Statutes Of Canada In 1906 Publication

• 1907: Founding of the Office international d’Hygiene publique

• 1911-1912: Twelfth International Sanitary Conference, Paris

• 1912: Canadian Public Health Association Incorporated

• 1919: Bill 37, Canada forms the Department of Health

• 1926: Thirteenth International Sanitary Conference, Paris

• 1928: Bill 205, Canada’s DOH becomes Department of Pensions and National Health

• 1938: Fourteenth International Sanitary Conference, Paris

• 1944: Bill C-149, Canada’s DPNH becomes Department of National Health and Welfare

• 1946: Canada joins World Health Organization, agrees toConstitution

• 1951: International Sanitation Regulations take effect from WHO

• 1959: “Privileges And Immunities” granted to all WHO Officials

• 1969: International Health Regulations (1st Ed.) replace Sanitation Regulations

• 1984: Bill C-3, Health Canada Act passed

• 1993: Department of National Health and Welfare becomes Health Canada

• 1995: 2nd Edition of WHO International Health Regulations

• 2001: DARK WINTER pandemic simulation plays out

• 2004: WHO issues edict all Members to have “public health outpost”

• 2004: PHAC, Public Health Agency of Canada, created by Order In Council

• 2004: Bill C-12, hearings on Quarantine Act in Parliament

• 2005: 3rd Edition of WHO International Health Regulations

• 2005: ATLANTIC STORM pandemic simulation plays out

• 2006: PHAC Act introduced by Harper Government

• 2010: Rockefeller paper released, includes infamous LOCKSTEP SCENARIO

• 2010: Theresa Tam stars in movie about fictional outbreak

• 2017: SPARS Pandemic Scenario plays out

• 2018: CLADE X pandemic simulation plays out

• 2019: EVENT 201 pandemic simulation plays out

Some more important dates to know:

"Mr. Chair, I'll speak to subdivision K, as well as subdivision L, given their similarities. The proposed legislative amendment to the Quarantine Act and to the Human Pathogens and Toxins Act would streamline the regulatory process under both acts by repealing the requirement for the Minister of Health to table proposed regulations before both Houses of Parliament prior to making new or updated regulations. This will allow the minister to proceed through the standard Governor in Council process, including prepublication and public consultation in the Canada Gazette. New or updated regulations under both of these acts would continue to comply with the cabinet directive on regulations.

The proposed amendments would put the Public Health Agency of Canada on level footing with other Canadian regulators and we will be more responsive to stakeholder needs for nimble, agile regulations that are kept up to date by facilitating the removal of outdated or ineffective regulations that may not be adequately protecting the public health and safety or may hinder innovation and economic growth.

Our ability to have up-to-date regulations will be a benefit for the Canadian public, for the travel and transportation sectors, and for the biotech and medical resource sectors.

That was it. There was no debate on removing Parliamentary oversight. It was just a read-in that lasted less than 2 minutes."

This was Cindy Evans of the Public Health Agency of Canada explaining why there was really no need for Parliamentary consultation or oversight prior to changing regulations.

This was May 6, 2019, and it was slipped into Bill C-97, which was a budget bill. It doesn’t look like this was ever debated at the time.

https://www.parl.ca/LegisInfo/en/bill/42-1/C-97

https://parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/bill/C-97/third-reading

https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/FINA/meeting-208/evidence

https://parlvu.parl.gc.ca/Harmony/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20190506/- 1/31498?Embedded=true&globalstreamId=20&startposition=5398&viewMode=3

https://www.bitchute.com/video/eh2uE4TRKbhm/

Less than a year later, the Quarantine Act would be invoked, and now with no oversight. But that’s probably just a coincidence.

https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/ https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/index.aspx

https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/details.aspx?lang=eng&id=103984&t=637793587893732877 https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/details.aspx?lang=eng&id=103986&t=637862410289812632 https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/details.aspx?lang=eng&id=103990&t=637793587893576566 https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/details.aspx?lang=eng&id=103994&t=637862410289656362 https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/details.aspx?lang=eng&id=103997&t=637793622744842730 https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/details.aspx?lang=eng&id=105025&t=637793622744842730

TEXT OF WHO CONSTITUTION:

https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/WHO-Constitution-Full-Document.pdf https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/WHO-Constitution-Full-Document-MARKED.pdf

[Article 4] 

Members of the United Nations may become Members of the Organization by signing or otherwise accepting this Constitution in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XIX and in accordance with their constitutional processes

[Article 7] 

If a Member fails to meet its financial obligations to the Organization or in other exceptional circumstances, the Health Assembly may, on such conditions as it thinks proper, suspend the voting privileges and services to which a Member is entitled. The Health Assembly shall have the authority to restore such voting

privileges and services

[Article 19] 

The Health Assembly shall have authority to adopt conventions or agreements with respect to any matter within the competence of the Organization. A two-thirds vote of the Health Assembly shall be required for the adoption of such conventions or agreements, which shall come into force for each Member when accepted by it in accordance with its constitutional processes.

[Article 20] 

Each Member undertakes that it will, within eighteen months after the adoption by the Health Assembly of a convention or agreement, take action relative to the acceptance of such convention or agreement. Each Member shall notify the Director-General of the action taken, and if it does not accept such convention or agreement within the time limit, it will furnish a statement of the reasons for non-acceptance. In case of acceptance, each Member agrees to make an annual report to the Director-General in accordance with Chapter XIV.

[Article 21] 

The Health Assembly shall have authority to adopt regulations concerning:

(a) sanitary and quarantine requirements and other procedures designed to prevent the international spread of disease;

(b) nomenclatures with respect to diseases, causes of death and public health practices;

(c) standards with respect to diagnostic procedures for international use;

(d) standards with respect to the safety, purity and potency of biological, pharmaceutical and similar products moving in international commerce;

(e) advertising and labelling of biological, pharmaceutical and similar products moving in international commerce.

[Article 22] 

Regulations adopted pursuant to Article 21 shall come into force for all Members after due notice has been given of their adoption by the Health

Assembly except for such Members as may notify the Director-General of rejection or reservations within the period stated in the notice

[Article 54]

The Pan American Sanitary Organization1 represented by the Pan American Sanitary Bureau and the Pan American Sanitary Conferences, and all other inter-governmental regional health organizations in existence prior to the date of signature of this Constitution, shall in due course be integrated with the Organization. This integration shall be effected as soon as practicable through common action based on mutual consent of the competent authorities expressed through the organizations concerned.

[Article 66] 

The Organization shall enjoy in the territory of each Member such

legal capacity as may be necessary for the fulfilment of its objective and for the exercise of its functions.

[Article 67] 

(a) The Organization shall enjoy in the territory of each Member such privileges and immunities as may be necessary for the fulfilment of its objective and for the exercise of its functions.

(b) Representatives of Members, persons designated to serve on the Board and technical and administrative personnel of the Organization shall similarly enjoy such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functions in connection with the Organization.

[Article 68] 

Such legal capacity, privileges and immunities shall be defined in a separate agreement to be prepared by the Organization in consultation with the Secretary-General of the United Nations and concluded between the Members.

[Article 71] 

The Organization may, on matters within its competence, make

suitable arrangements for consultation and co-operation with non-governmental international organizations and, with the consent of the Government concerned, with national organizations, governmental or non-governmental.

[Article 72] 

Subject to the approval by a two-thirds vote of the Health Assembly, the Organization may take over from any other international organization or

agency whose purpose and activities lie within the field of competence of the Organization such functions, resources and obligations as may be conferred upon the Organization by international agreement or by mutually acceptable

arrangements entered into between the competent authorities of the respective organizations.

https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/IHR-3rd-Edition-Full-Text-2005.pdf https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/WHO-IHR-3rd-Edition-Full-Text-2005-MARKED.pdf

Article 4 Responsible authorities

1. Each State Party shall designate or establish a National IHR Focal Point and the authorities responsible within its respective jurisdiction for the implementation of health measures under these Regulations.

2. National IHR Focal Points shall be accessible at all times for communications with the WHO IHR Contact Points provided for in paragraph 3 of this Article. The functions of National IHR Focal Points shall include:

(a) sending to WHO IHR Contact Points, on behalf of the State Party concerned, urgent communications concerning the implementation of these Regulations, in particular under Articles 6 to 12; and

(b) disseminating information to, and consolidating input from, relevant sectors of the administration of the State Party concerned, including those responsible for surveillance and reporting, points of entry, public health services, clinics and hospitals and other government departments.

3. WHO shall designate IHR Contact Points, which shall be accessible at all times for communications with National IHR Focal Points. WHO IHR Contact Points shall send urgent communications concerning the implementation of these

Regulations, in particular under Articles 6 to 12, to the National IHR Focal Point of the States Parties concerned. WHO IHR Contact Points may be designated by WHO at the headquarters or at the regional level of the Organization.

4. States Parties shall provide WHO with contact details of their National IHR Focal Point and WHO shall provide States Parties with contact details of WHO IHR

Contact Points. These contact details shall be continuously updated and annually confirmed. WHO shall make available to all States Parties the contact details of National IHR Focal Points it receives pursuant to this Article.

Article 5 Surveillance

1. Each State Party shall develop, strengthen and maintain, as soon as possible but no later than five years from the entry into force of these Regulations for that State Party, the capacity to detect, assess, notify and report events in accordance with these Regulations, as specified in Annex 1.

2. Following the assessment referred to in paragraph 2, Part A of Annex 1, a State Party may report to WHO on the basis of a justified need and an implementation plan and, in so doing, obtain an extension of two years in which to fulfil the obligation in paragraph 1 of this Article. In exceptional circumstances, and supported by a new implementation plan, the State Party may request a further extension not exceeding two years from the Director-General, who shall make the decision, taking into account the technical advice of the Committee established under Article 50 (hereinafter the “Review Committee”). After the period mentioned in paragraph 1 of this Article, the State Party that has obtained an extension shall report annually to WHO on progress made towards the full

implementation.

3. WHO shall assist States Parties, upon request, to develop, strengthen and maintain the capacities referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article.

4. WHO shall collect information regarding events through its surveillance

activities and assess their potential to cause international disease spread and possible interference with international traffic. Information received by WHO under this paragraph shall be handled in accordance with Articles 11 and 45 where appropriate.

Recommendations issued by WHO to States Parties with respect to persons may include the following advice:

– no specific health measures are advised;

– review travel history in affected areas;

– review proof of medical examination and any laboratory analysis;

– require medical examinations;

– review proof of vaccination or other prophylaxis;

– require vaccination or other prophylaxis;

– place suspect persons under public health observation;

– implement quarantine or other health measures for suspect persons;

– implement isolation and treatment where necessary of affected persons;

– implement tracing of contacts of suspect or affected persons;

– refuse entry of suspect and affected persons;

– refuse entry of unaffected persons to affected areas; and

– implement exit screening and/or restrictions on persons from affected areas.

Subject to Article 43 or as authorized in applicable international agreements, a suspect traveller who on arrival is placed under public health observation may continue an international voyage, if the traveller does not pose an imminent public health risk and the State Party informs the competent authority of the point of entry at destination, if known, of the traveller’s expected arrival. On

arrival, the traveller shall report to that authority.

1. Invasive medical examination, vaccination or other prophylaxis shall not be required as a condition of entry of any traveller to the territory of a State Party, except that, subject to Articles 32, 42 and 45, these Regulations do not preclude States Parties from requiring medical examination, vaccination or other prophylaxis or proof of vaccination or other prophylaxis:

(a) when necessary to determine whether a public health risk exists;

(b) as a condition of entry for any travellers seeking temporary or permanent residence;

(c) as a condition of entry for any travellers pursuant to Article 43 or Annexes 6 and 7; or

(d) which may be carried out pursuant to Article 23.

2. If a traveller for whom a State Party may require a medical examination,

vaccination or other prophylaxis under paragraph 1 of this Article fails to consent to any such measure, or refuses to provide the information or the documents referred to in paragraph 1(a) of Article 23, the State Party concerned may, subject to Articles 32, 42 and 45, deny entry to that traveller. If there is evidence of an

imminent public health risk, the State Party may, in accordance with its national law and to the extent necessary to control such a risk, compel the traveller to undergo or advise the traveller, pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article 23, to undergo:

https://web.archive.org/web/20220623124958/https://www.who.int/teams/ihr/national-focal- points

https://web.archive.org/web/20220513205001/https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/inte rnational-health-regulations-(2005)-toolkit-for-implementation-in-national-legislation

https://web.archive.org/web/20220327145226/https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default- source/documents/emergencies/ihr-toolkit-for-implementation-in-national-legislation3cceba0c- 4580-48a4-9d4e-2b17a2146b66.pdf?sfvrsn=60aea14d_1&download=true

https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/documents/emergencies/ihr-toolkit-for- implementation-in-national-legislation3cceba0c-4580-48a4-9d4e-

2b17a2146b66.pdf?sfvrsn=60aea14d_1&download=true
 

https://www.ourcommons.ca/Committees/en/HESA/StudyActivity?studyActivityId=981075 https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/38-1/HESA/report-2/

"Are you aware of international standards for quarantine?

Dr. Paul Gully: The international health regulations would be the regulations that individual states would then use to design their quarantine acts. I don’t know of any other standards out there or best practices to look at quarantine acts, but the IHRs really have been used over the years as the starting point.

Now, with the improvement of the international health regulations, maybe, as is the case in Canada, changes will occur to quarantine acts in other countries in order to better comply with the international health regulations.

(11:55)

Mrs. Carol Skelton: When did these consultations begin, and how long do you expect they will go on?

Dr. Paul Gully: We had a meeting in September with the provinces and territories in Edmonton about the Quarantine Act as it stood at that time. We got input. We’re having another teleconference with the Council of Chief Medical Officers next week to talk about a number of issues that were raised and to further clarify what they would like to see as changes to the bill as it stands at the present time.

Mrs. Carol Skelton: Why did Health Canada proceed with a separate Quarantine Act at this time?

Dr. Paul Gully: Those of us who administered the Quarantine Act over the years always knew there were deficiencies in the old act, and because it was rarely used there wasn’t the inclination to update it. As a result of SARS and utilization of the act, which certainly put it under close scrutiny, and the requirement for the Government of Canada to respond to the various reports on SARS, it was felt that updating the act sooner rather than later was appropriate.

In addition, during discussions about the international health regulations of the World Health Organization, it was felt that it was appropriate to do it and to spend time and energy, which it obviously does require, to do it now, before other parts of legislative renewal, of which Mr. Simard is well aware, were further implemented or further discussion was carried out.

(12:05)

Ms. Ruby Dhalla: I have one question. In terms of the Quarantine Act for our country, where are we at in terms of best practices models when we look at the international spectrum?

Dr. Paul Gully: I don’t know the acts in other countries, but because we are updating our act right now and we’re taking into account the probable revisions to the IHR."

This is from the November 4, 2004 transcript. Read for yourself to ensure that nothing is being taken out of context.

https://canucklaw.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Canada-Quarantine-Act-Nov-4-Hearing.pdf

https://www.canada.ca/en/news/archive/2004/11/international-health-regulations.html

November 3, 2004 - Canada News Announcement of International Health Regulations Agreement:

For Immediate Release The Government of Canada and other member states of the World Health Organization (WHO) will work to reach agreement on revised International Health Regulations at the Intergovernmental Working Group meeting in Geneva from November 1-12, 2004. Canada has played an active role in the revision of the regulations, which will help countries worldwide deal more effectively with international public health emergencies, and better protect the health of Canadians. "Outbreaks such as SARS and avian influenza, as well as the resurgence of infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, have underscored the need for effective international monitoring, reporting and response," said Minister of Health Ujjal Dosanjh. "Protecting against the international spread of disease is of critical importance when you consider that Canadians took more than 20 million trips abroad last year and Canada was a major destination point for millions of foreign visitors," added Minister of Foreign Affairs, Pierre Pettigrew. "The regulations will help to ensure a greater level of safety for travelling and domestic populations." The purpose of the revised regulations is to protect against, control and respond to the international spread of diseases, while avoiding unnecessary interference with international traffic.

They will establish a framework for effective international co operation in monitoring, reporting and responding to public health emergencies of international concern. They also put in place a transparent and rigorous process for declaring public health emergencies of international concern. In response to the SARS outbreak and the emergence of avian influenza, the Government of Canada has taken a number of steps to strengthen our public health capacity. Canada's involvement in the negotiation of the revised regulations, as well as the establishment of a Public Health Agency of Canada, are among those initiatives. The new Public Health Agency of Canada will be the "national focal point" for Canada's communications with the WHO in the event of a disease outbreak or public health emergency of international concern. It will play a key role in Canada's compliance with the new regulations, coordinating federal efforts to identify and reduce public health risks and threats, and supporting national readiness to respond to public health emergencies. The Agency will act as a hub for health surveillance, threat identification, disease prevention and control programs. The Agency will also work with global partners such as the WHO, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the new European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, as well as other public health agencies around the world, sharing Canada's public health expertise, benefitting from others' experience, and creating international networks for collaboration and cooperation. "With the establishment of the Public Health Agency of Canada and the appointment of the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada, as well as our already advanced public health infrastructure, Canada is well positioned to meet the requirements of the revised regulations," added Dr. Carolyn Bennett, Minister of State (Public Health). The proposed revisions contain a number of changes to the existing regulations, which were adopted in 1969: The scope of the regulations is broader. Member states will be required to notify the WHO of all events that could be considered "a public health emergency of international concern", rather than provide notification for only the three currently listed diseases of cholera, yellow fever and the plague. All member states will be required to establish a national IHR focal point to act as the contact point for WHO at all times, and play a central role in the notification of potential public health emergencies of international concern. In Canada, the new Public Health Agency of Canada will be this focal point. The revised regulations establish minimum requirements for surveillance and response capacities by member states. The revised regulations also outline an agreed process that member states will be required to follow in determining a public health emergency of international concern, and that the WHO will follow in issuing recommendations with respect to health and control measures that might be needed. The Government of Canada strongly supports the need for the updating of these

International Health Regulations, and looks forward to participating in the upcoming negotiations.