By Anthony Webber:
The House of Commons Petitions Committee informed me on 1st March that they had decided not to hold a Parliamentary debate on the successful Petition to hold a UK Referendum on the UK Coronavirus Act.
The Petition, which is still open and does not close until 28th March is : https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/597665
This has achieved 109,507 signatures at the time of writing, an amazing achievement as it has been totally no platformed by all of the mainstream media in the UK. ( To qualify for Parliamentary debate, 100,000 signatures are required and this target was reached on 15th December 2021).
The Petition is one of only 15 Petitions which have qualified where the HOC Petitions Committee have decided not to debate. With those not debated there has normally been a reasonably good reason for that decision. With this Petition the reasons are stretching credibility and could be deemed as putting up a polite two fingers to those who signed it. There have been 118 Petitions debated so far.
The Petitions Committee have said:
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 4:48 PM
To: Anthony Webber
Subject: RE: Petition re Referendum on UK Coronavirus Act -Plan for ‘living with covid-19’ set out by the Prime Minister
Good afternoon Anthony
The Petitions Committee met today and agreed, following recent announcements, not to schedule a debate on your petition.
The Committee recognised the support that this petition has received. However, now the Government has removed all domestic restrictions in England relating to covid-19, and set out plans for expiring the remaining temporary provisions of the Coronavirus Act 2019, the request of this petition has been largely overtaken by events.
We’ll be messaging people who signed your petition to let them know that the Committee has agreed not to schedule a debate on your petition, with a short explanation of why.
I know this news will be disappointing, but I hope you understand the Committee’s reasons for taking this decision.
Kind regards
Ed
In response, the following was said:
Subject: URGENT: Petition re Referendum on UK Coronavirus Act -Plan for ‘living with covid-19’ set out by the Prime Minister
Dear Ed
Thank you for your email but I ask the Committee to re-consider their decision as it is premature.
The Petition is to have a Referendum on abolishing the UK Coronavirus Act.
Our understanding is that the government intends to keep four provisions of the Act for another six months, so the Act will still exists.
A decision not to debate the Petition would be understandable if the Act was to be abolished entirely, but it isn’t.
Therefore we ask for this decision to be stayed/delayed as the Act is not intended to be abolished for another six months.
If the Committee is not prepared to do this, please inform me of the procedure for Appealing such a decision ? It certainly would undermine confidence in the Petitions Committee and the Petitions procedures if the Committee ignores what a Petition is requesting.
With thanks for your consideration of this and I look forward to hearing from you.
Anthony
Anthony Webber
The HOC Petitions reply was:
Dear Anthony
I’m sorry you’re disappointed by the Petitions Committee’s decision not to schedule a debate on your petition, but decisions by the Committee about whether or not to debate a petition are final, and there is no procedure for appealing these decisions.
The Committee is aware that not all of the provisions of the Coronavirus Act have expired. However, in taking decisions about whether or not to debate a petition, the Committee considers the value of, and likely interest in, a debate on a petition. The decision not to debate this petition was made in light of the provisions of the Coronavirus Act having mostly expired, and the House having recently had the opportunity to question the Prime Minister about the Government’s plans for living with covid-19 – included its plans relating to the Coronavirus Act.
Kind regards
Ed
Note: Attached a copy of the Government’s “Living with covid-19 strategy,” especially pages 44-48.
Petition has successfully made the government go on the retreat:
The government’s retreat on most of the provisions of the UK Coronavirus Act has been the result of a massive campaign by the freedom movement, of which the Parliamentary Petition has played a significant and influencing part. There has been much social media debate on this even though it has been ignored by the mainstream “old” media. It is interesting to note that these “old” media have actively promoted Parliamentary and other Petitions which suited their covid agenda, but have never promoted any of those for the freedom cause.
This demonstrates just how much control the globalists have on our “old” media and our governments themselves. We should always remember what we are up against – interests which favour a wealthy few and which are certainly not those of the British or indeed world public.
A big thank you to all who signed and promoted the Petition.
This includes Unity News, other free media, a number of freedom organisations and individuals and many others too numerous to name. This included some personalities such as Lawrence Fox, Martin Daubney and even Jennifer Acuri. There were also a number of media personalities, and four freedom orientated political parties.
It is undoubtedly true that to this day, many people even in the wide freedom movement, have not even heard of the Petition. That is the tactic of the controlled “old” media. To No platform causes and campaigns which do not suit their agenda. If the “old” media had mentioned this Petition, the signatures would have reached a million with no problem.
So the pressure we put on the government works, even though they often twist the system to suit their own purposes.
We knew at the start of this Petition that it put the government in a difficult position and one they would try to wriggle out of.
They simply could not afford to have a debate about a Referendum on abolishing the Act, let alone allow the Referendum to take place.
Allowing the Parliamentary debate would have amplified the fact that everything the government have done in respect of their covid policy has had absolutely no consent from the British public.
Allowing a Referendum would have been too risky for them, as with Referenda rules, each side has to be given equal media time.
As the freedom side has effectively been denied any voice at all over the last two years, they could not facilitate the public suddenly being able to be given the truth.
After all, in Switzerland, with their two covid referenda, the freedom side obtained 40% of the vote.
It would have been too close to call as the freedom side only needed to obtain an extra 10% of votes to win in the UK. Even if the freedom side actually lost, the damage to the government’s reputation, would have been beyond repair. The public would have been informed and no longer denied the truth, and that was too dangerous for the government to allow to happen.
At present we are analysing the situation with regard to the implications of having four provisions of the Act continue. In the meantime, it is worth noting what is said in the following article about it:
https://off-guardian.org/2022/02/28/uk-govt-to-make-some-covid-laws-permanent/
Looking ahead, we have to continue with the fight for freedom, which is still on many fronts.
It is also important to continue to back Parliamentary Petitions. Remember, the powers that be don’t want “freedom” Petitions signed, so they will continue to ensure the “old” media do not inform the public about them. We must redouble our efforts with Petitions and they only take a couple of minutes to sign.
These Petitions very much merit being signed in particular:
Open a Public Inquiry into Covid-19 Vaccines Safety, currently on 68,156 signatures:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/602171
Don’t offer covid-19 vaccines to 5-11 year olds until phase three trials complete, currently on 9,972 signatures:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/601959
Even though Parliament has demonstrated its inability to provide any effective opposition alternative to the government’s covid-19 policies, and even though this “coalition/collaboration” influence extends to the supposedly independent House of Commons Petitions Committee, we can still get Petitions debated.
There is the old maxim….. “If at first you do not succeed, try, try again, until you do !”
Anthony Webber
Independent Political Commentator
Joint Founder, National Alliance For Freedom ( previously also from lockdowns )
https://nationalalliance.org.uk
@NationalAlliaUK
Opinions from the Unity News Network (UNN) editorial team & various contributors. | UNN always clearly distinguishes between news and opinion pieces and as an open minded outlet we publish views from a variety of people and organisation that do not necessarily reflect the views of UNN or its writers. Articles published under UNN Opinions are always opinion pieces and if published on behalf of a contributor will contain that authors name at the start of the piece.
