Note: See the Covid Inquiry Terms of Reference announcement on 10 March, below John Stone's submission.
By John Stone
The consultation closes 11.59pm UK time April 7. Submissions can be made until that time here. These are the substantive points I have made to the inquiry on behalf of Age of Autism on their questionnaire.
Please explain why you think the draft Terms of Reference do not cover all the areas that the Inquiry should address.
Insufficient focus on transparency and openness of decision making, suspension of ordinary human rights, free speech and civil liberties, the creation of an atmosphere of coercion over many matters, cronyism: the apparent wilful destruction of ordinary civil society and its economy
Which issues or topics do you think the Inquiry should look at first?
Why nothing was quite what it seemed
Why we were ill-prepared in terms of hospital capacity, supplies
Why we ignored pandemic protocols apparently already in place
Why we accepted the word of Chinese officials about the genetic sequence of the virus, and why so many vaccine designers/companies were instantly confident of the products they were designing
Why we suppressed evidence - now widely accepted - of escape from the Wuhan lab
Why we gaslighted conventional interventions - disregarding doctors already skilled at treating respiratory viruses - and made a break-neck dash for so called “vaccines” with novel technologies
Why we discouraged healthy lifestyles, side-lined issues such as Vitamin D deficiency which has previously been routinely treated by doctors
Why there was widespread use of midazolam
Why a horrendously expensive drug Remdesivir, without any track record, was preferred to well establish safe products like Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin
How the Coronavirus Act legislation comprising hundreds of pages (and similar to legislation in other countries) appeared from nowhere
How cronyism was allowed to proliferate at unprecedented levels in government
Why informed public discussion was restricted on mainstream and social media including many highly qualified voices - why public money was used to promote certain views and suppress others
Why the seriousness of Covid was actually downgraded by the CMOs immediately prior to the first lockdown
Why so many un-evidenced measures restricting freedom of movement and normal behaviour were introduced, heightening fears, while not being taken seriously by government ministers and high-ranking officials
Why people were left to isolate indefinitely and die alone
Why masks were introduced despite there not being “strong evidence” according deputy CMO Jenny Harries
Why normal ethics, the Nuremberg Code, informed consent were abandoned for injections which had limited trial data, less than complete information about ingredients, hidden contracts etc, amid an atmosphere of gaslighting, bullying and restrictions on those who were not compliant - why the issue of vaccine compliance became conflated with the official ID agenda of the United Nation, organisations such as the World Economic Forum (endorsed by the Prince of Wales on a government website), which has never been discussed with the British electorate
From Gov.UK: Covid Inquiry Terms of Reference
Today (Thursday 10 March) the government has published draft terms of reference for the forthcoming public inquiry into the COVID-19 pandemic.
This follows consultation with the Inquiry Chair, Baroness Hallett, and close work with ministers in the devolved administrations.
The terms of reference intend to cover:
the public health response
the response in the health and care sector
our economic response
The inquiry will play a key role in learning the lessons from the pandemic and informing the government’s preparations for the future.
Following work with the devolved administrations the terms allow for an inquiry which is UK-wide, but which respects and does not duplicate any inquiry established on a devolved basis. It also reflects the importance of understanding the experiences of those most affected by the pandemic - including bereaved families - as well as looking at any disparities evident in the impact of the pandemic and the government’s response.
There will now be a period of public engagement and consultation. This process is expected to last for four weeks and will be led by Baroness Hallett to inform further changes to the terms of reference before they are finalised.