Canada wants to expand the scope of the World Health Organization, WHO’s global pandemic agreement (treaty) by adding more censorship measures.
The initiative is to add social media “misinformation” (and censorship thereof) to the discussion of the draft treaty. In anticipation of the “next pandemic,” Canada also wants more attention to be paid to what it considers diversity, equity, and inclusion.
The treaty’s purpose is to give WHO an active role in directing how the United Nation’s 193 member countries deal with pandemics or other health crises. However, the negotiators failed to agree on the text of the document by the May deadline this year.
At the end of the same month, there was a new version of the pandemic agreement draft that softened the tone of some of the censorship provisions but gave WHO more surveillance powers.
Before the latest version was published, what are referred to as “partners and stakeholders” in Canada wanted to add measures such as holding social media platforms “accountable for the content they host” (depending on what type of “accountability” the authors of the proposals had in mind, it’s unclear how this would be acceptable, for example, to the US, given its Section 230).
More ideas coming out of Canada include burdening the same entities with accountability “for the impact of their algorithms” – all this in the context of the “threat of misinformation.”
More “threats” that are predictably cited these days in certain quarters include “AI”, and when it comes to surveillance, the treaty should provide for “inclusive practices,” the Canadian proposal says.
“Comprehensive prevention strategies, inclusive surveillance practices, and addressing challenges for marginalized communities are essential for effective pandemic prevention,” the conclusions from the meetings held in January and February 2024 in several cities specify.
Canada’s Liberal government has chosen not to stick its neck out by openly pushing for such measures, and is very careful to note that in a report, but it’s clear enough how the system works: “partners” and “stakeholders” are said to be behind the proposals – and they work with the Office of International Affairs for the Health Portfolio, a government entity.
The Office had brought together over 100 people from indigenous groups, universities, civil society, public and private sectors, as well as territorial and provincial governments.
