UK Government and the COVID jabs—the 25-year love affair exposed at last
Big pharma and UK Government been sleeping together - who knew?
UK Government’s infatuation with Life Sciences
You may not know, but the UK Government has been making up to big pharma for nearly 25 years now. It began with the formation of the Ministerial Industry Strategy Group in 2001. This is an extract from the first meeting:
“The first meeting of the Ministerial Industry Strategy Group (MISG), a high-level group bringing together government and pharmaceutical industry representatives, was held on 21 November 2001, as part of the follow-up to the implementation of the Pharmaceutical Industry Competitiveness Task Force (PICTF) recommendations.” [Note: Page Not Found]
The summary to the report asserts that: “The UK pharmaceutical industry remains among the most innovative, behind the US.”
What they do not appear to have picked up on was that the global pharmaceutical industry was in deep trouble at the time, evidenced by this US Government Accountability Office (US GAO) Report:
Subscribers may remember me quoting this report numbers of times, as it highlights the astronomically high failure rates in the industry at the time, which became even worse leading up to the plandemic. Being number 2 in the world for innovation, if it were true, was no cause for optimism.
Yet, UK plc bought into it, setting up the Ministerial Industry Strategy Group which first met in November 2001:
The full minutes can be found here:
MINISTERIAL INDUSTRY STRATEGY GROUP, WEDNESDAY 21 NOVEMBER 2001, The Cathedral Room, Richmond House
The Minutes begin:
“Welcome and Introductions
Tom McKillop welcomed everybody to the first meeting of the Ministerial Industry
Strategy Group. He said that the Pharmaceutical Industry Competitiveness Task Force
(PICTF) had been a very successful exercise for both government and industry, and it
was important to keep the momentum going.”
So, we have the CEO of AstraZeneca, the company that sold the gene therapy injections, chairing a Government Committee to discuss anything and everything to do with helping each other up the ladder of success.
This is where they were up to by 2014:
Note the players under the title ‘Industry’. Sold gold pharmaceutical interests sharing a room with top UK government ministers.
Then we see Guest Ian McCubbin, who became Chair of the Cell & Gene Therapy Catapult in 2022 after a long career at GSK running its global supply chain.
I met him at GSK House in 2012. I was not impressed.
Oh, yes, there’s Professor Sir John Bell, too!
This is what Paul Thacker, in an article for the BMJ titled “Tracking down John Bell: how the case of the Oxford professor exposes a transparency crisis in government” had to say about him:
“Since the covid-19 outbreak began early last year, John Bell, regius professor of medicine at Oxford University, has held high profile roles in the UK government’s epidemic response while also working with AstraZeneca on the vaccine.
But both Oxford and the government have refused to disclose Bell’s financial interests after The BMJ filed freedom of information (FOI) requests. More alarmingly, it appears that the government is referring media enquiries about Bell through the Cabinet Office and is scrutinising a reporter for The BMJ as it has other reporters it finds troublesome. The BMJ has been unable to gain either direct contact with Bell or contact through his employer, Oxford University, despite multiple attempts.”
Then, by 2015, we have:
Do I need to point out the players under Industry? In case I do, we have:
The CEO of AstraZeneca, Pascal Soriot, since awarded a knighthood.
CEO of the UK trade association for biotechnology companies.
Acting CEO of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry
Other big pharma executives, and of course, the ever present Patrick Vallance…where is he now?
As a guest, we have Tommy Dolan, who went on to become the first chair of the Medicines Industry Manufacturing Partnership. Prior to that, he had a long career heading up the Pfizer site in Sandwich, Kent.
Under officials, the most significant by far is Dr Ian Hudson, then CEO of the MHRA and a senior player at the European Medicines Agency (EMA).
Hudson joined the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in mid-2019 - now there’s a thing…he has since retired from the organisation.
This is the very last meeting:
Note point #6 above, this is Nicole Mather today:
“Dr. Nicole Mather
Health & Life Sciences Data & AI Lead, Partner, IBM Consulting, UK & Ireland
Dr Nicole Mather leads IBM’s Life Sciences consulting team in the UK, which brings world-leading business, technology and digital capabilities to innovative pharma and growing SMEs. As Director of the Office for Life Sciences, Nicole shaped the UK ecosystem and health data environment and led the UK government on the development of the Life Sciences Industrial Strategy and first Sector deal, focusing on the creation of new UK industries in the UK, such as Genomics, Digital Health, and early diagnosis. Nicole is a Non-Executive Director of the Wellcome Sanger Centre and the Health Research Authority and holds a DPhil, MSc, and MA from the University of Oxford.”
Interesting, eh?
What should people conclude from all this?
Not to lead the witness, I will abstain from sharing my views on the above, but feel free to share yours.
All I will say is that what we now know about the globalists (PM Blair was in power when the MISG was first established), and WEF, DAVOS, WHO, GATES, Microsoft, IBM, FAUCI, FARRAR, VALLANCE, WHITTY and Uncle Tom Cobley and all, suggests that there is a high degree of cross-fertilisation in the whole sorry COVID injections scam.
Further analysis, using your article as a springboard, Hedley, is available here: https://open.substack.com/pub/alisonwright/p/conflict-of-interest-and-legal-compliance?r=15h096&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
I gave the following analysis of Nicole Mather's IBM declaration and records for her in Companies House:
Improve this: by adding the legal breaches and answering the question posed. Add any further other observations you arrive at. "The IBM website describes Dr Nicole Mather, "Dr. Nicole Mather
Health & Life Sciences Data & AI Lead, Partner, IBM Consulting, UK & Ireland
Dr Nicole Mather leads IBM’s Life Sciences consulting team in the UK, which brings world-leading business, technology and digital capabilities to innovative pharma and growing SMEs. As Director of the Office for Life Sciences, Nicole shaped the UK ecosystem and health data environment and led the UK government on the development of the Life Sciences Industrial Strategy and first Sector deal, focusing on the creation of new UK industries in the UK, such as Genomics, Digital Health, and early diagnosis. Nicole is a Non-Executive Director of the Wellcome Sanger Centre and the Health Research Authority and holds a DPhil, MSc, and MA from the University of Oxford." (https://www.ibm.com/think/author/nicole-mather)
A search in Companies House on this name returns one for Dr Nicole Mather. This identity is associated to two private companies limited by guarantee without share capital: (https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/Q8Vy_Alz7OXjloJsheLlAWiNsks/appointments)
1. Cell Therapy Catapult Limited, Registered office address 12th Floor Tower Wing B, Guys Hospital, London, SE1 9RT, for "Other professional, scientific and technical activities not elsewhere classified", appointed 25 April 2024. It has charges outstanding to Innovate UK and the Technology Strategy Board. And,
2. Genome Research Limited, Registered office address Wellcome Sanger Institute Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, Saffron Walden, England, CB10 1SA, for "- Research and experimental development on biotechnology", appointed 29 July 2019. It's person with significant control is "The Wellcome Trust Limited, As Trustee Of The Wellcome Trust". Strictly speaking this is not the correct name, and this variation could cause non-match errors in audit software which relies on legal names being provided.
Comparing the IBM declaration of Dr Nicole Mather's interests on the IBM website there is evidence of obfuscation: Her IBM declaration declares "Wellcome Sanger Centre and the Health Research Authority" instead of "Cell Therapy Catapult" and "Genome Research Limited". "Wellcome Sanger Centre and the Health Research Authority" are two fictional names. This could cause non-match errors in audit and KYC. The risk to the public's best interest is Very High. As this associates IBM (and IBM Watson AI), with all genomic data held on the population.
This mirrors the situation preceding World War II during which time IBM provided solutions to the Third Reich (Chairman was Thomas Watson) making use of census data to identify targets of and for the Third Reich, using Hollerith machines and data punch cards. These machines were also used to manage the "Human Resources" and suppliers in the concentration camps.
Is this a conflict of interest with her role at IBM?" I'll publish the response on my substack as it is lengthy.