Dear Councillors and Officers of Kirklees Council,
I am writing to you, on behalf of myself and the co-signatories listed, following the recent abrupt resignation of former council leader, Shabir Pandor, a resignation that was prompted by an upcoming no-confidence vote that he was expected to lose.
The BBC described the council's leadership under Pandor as "too distant", with a "lack of accountability and poor communication".
As a resident of Kirklees who has attempted to communicate with Mr Pandor, and other high-ranking members of the council, on numerous occasions over the last three years, and on matters of acute urgency (it would not be too extreme to say "life and death"), I can confirm that this is an accurate summation.
It is therefore my hope that the renewed council leadership, which has challenged and put an end to Mr Pandor's corrupt, unaccountable, and ineffectual regime, will address the concerns I have with the gravity and seriousness that they deserve, rather than the glib dismissals I had come to expect from Mr Pandor.
As a freelance writer with a speciality in open letters, all my past correspondence to Mr Pandor has been made public, as this letter has been, too.
To sum, the nature of my past concerns related to the grotesque mismanagement by Kirklees Council of the "Covid pandemic", with particular reference to Kirklees' uncritical and unethical promotion of the experimental injections known as Covid vaccines - a promotion which went so far as to use public money to bribe inexperienced teenagers to endorse these injections on their social media pages (a fact that was uncovered by investigative journalists at The Examiner newspaper). This of course is staggeringly unethical to the point of being legally questionable, as I elucidated to the council in my letter.
Kirklees Council has to date dealt with none of my concerns adequately, which appears to be a reflection of the general organisational structure of corruption, arrogance, and chaos as sponsored by Mr Pandor.
Now that Pandor has departed, and thus, I assume, so has the attitude of aloof dismissal towards Kirklees residents he displayed and encouraged, I ask you to turn your urgent attentions to the imminent manufacture of another "pandemic", which - if it goes ahead - would likely prove even more disastrous to the residents of Kirklees than the last one.
Please note the deeply distressing and terminal decline of Huddersfield town centre as an example, where multiple, previously thriving and signature, businesses have closed their doors for good. Many more local businesses are now teetering on the precipice of collapse, and another declared "pandemic", with attendant shutdowns and restrictions, would destroy them - and the jobs and opportunities they created - permanently.
So is another "pandemic" on its way?
Please note that, as of Friday 1st September, the UK government intends to offer the proven dangerous flu nasal spray to every child in the country aged from 2 to 16. Such a huge childhood cohort has never before been offered this concoction, as most in this demographic are not at high risk for the condition the spray claims to prevent.
Meanwhile, the 50-64 year-old cohort, who are at much higher risk from the flu than healthy children, are not being offered a flu vaccination.
This makes no sense from an epidemiological, medical, or economical point of view. If the point of the flu vaccine is to protect from harm those most vulnerable to flu's complications, then they are the ones who should be prioritised for the flu vaccine.
Healthy children, especially teenagers, are not at high risk, and the Joint Committee for Vaccination and Immunisation, which advises the government on vaccination, has itself said, only those at "high risk of serious disease" should be offered a free flu vaccine.
Yet, a cohort of millions of children who are not at high risk at all, are being offered the flu spray, at huge public expense.
This is an inexplicable strategy if the end goal is to reduce the maximal number of serious complications from the flu (hospital admission and death), as healthy teens are at effectively zero risk of these complications.
Therefore, logic dictates there is highly likely to be another reason for the UK government spending such large sums to orchestrate such a massive immunisation exercise to a cohort not at serious risk from the condition the vaccine claims to prevent.
The flu nasal spray is known to create and spread illness in children, and does so every year. If it is being administered to more children than usual, it therefore follows it will create more illness than usual.
In 2022, the then-Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, warned the UK public that we would return to a lockdown situation if there was a "new variant that affects children". The UK government has already told the public to prepare for another pandemic where lockdowns and other restrictions are applied much more harshly, and beyond what "feels comfortable".
It is therefore the contention of several researchers at this time that the flu spray being disseminated in all the nation's schools between September and December this year could create a wave of illness that will be labelled a new pandemic, and therefore used as an excuse by the government to plunge the country back into lockdown.
I am writing to you today, as local government employees who will be tasked by central government with imposing any such restrictions, to let you know of this plausible imminent future. Therefore, if and when central government does instruct you that there is a "new variant that affects children", and tells you to once again destructively dismantle thousands of lives, by closing businesses, shutting schools, and disrupting travel, you have the information at your disposal to reject these instructions.
A spate of illness that is caused by putting toxic ingredients directly up children's noses is not "a new pandemic" that requires any draconian and undemocratic restrictions imposed on the rest of the populace by the government. All that is required is that the unwell children are treated appropriately - and, ideally, that the flu spray, dangerous and unnecessary, is withdrawn from schools for good. The evidence supporting the use of this spray is very poor, and common sense dictates that healthy children do not need to be vaccinated against ordinary seasonal illnesses, as for many past generations they were not.
Please note that the Informed Consent Matters independent health resource, that I co-founded, along with an individual with extensive experience in health and social care, has been actively campaigning to raise awareness of these issues, including sending letters directly to schools and disseminating leaflets to share information in the community.
I am therefore writing to you in my capacity as a campaigner to ensure you are aware of these issues too, and to furnish you with facts you may previously not have had: facts that will, I sincerely hope, enable you to make far more ethical, humane, and evidence-based decisions than your predecessors - especially where it comes to the critical matter of children's health.
Please note this letter is being sent to multiple recipients, including my local ward councillors, Manisha Roma Kaushik, Imran Safdar, and Jo Lawson, whom, as my direct local representatives, have a duty to respond.
I look forward to hearing from you promptly.
Miriam Finch (Crosland Moor, HD4)
(Plus four co-signs, redacted for privacy in the public version of this letter)