Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2016

The AIH Transcript for August 23, 2017

Hosts: Jim Brown and Karen Gordon

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

JIM BROWN: Hello. I'm Jim Brown, sitting in for Carol Off.

KAREN GORDON: Good evening. I'm Karen Gordon, sitting in for Jeff Douglas. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

RD: Tonight:

JB: Funnel vision. a storm arrives by surprise in Lachute, Quebec, bringing with it a tornado. And our guest’s quiet afternoon taking care of her grandkids ends with her neighbor's roof in her pool.

KG: End of story. Swedish freelance journalist Kim Wall was in the middle of a remarkable career. Now, over a week after she disappeared, police in Denmark have confirmed the body they found in the water is hers.

JB: The first to go. John A. McDonald was an architect of Canada, but he was also an architect of Canada’s residential schools, which is why Ontario's elementary teachers’ union is pushing to rename schools named for our first PM.

KG: Project Projectile Protection. A Liberal MP tells us why he believes it might be time to reverse the 2005 decision, made by then Liberal PM Paul Martin, and join a US ballistic missile defense shield.

JB: A splitting headache. Muslim men in India could instantly divorce their wives just by saying “talaq” to them three times. Until this week, when the country's Supreme Court said, “a thousand times no”.

KG: And… he didn't just serve chicken fingers, he has them. Surveillance video shows the owner of a fast food joint in Alberta mishandling raw chicken, over relying on the five second rule and submerging his bear arms in barbecue sauce. As It Happens, the Wednesday edition. Radio that warns the sauce may not be dangerous, but it is heavily armed.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Part 1: Quebec storm, Sir John A. Macdonald schools, Carl’s Jr. ex-manager

Quebec storm

Guest: Lorraine Girard

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: A scary storm and some shouting in French]

KG: That was the sound from a video posted on Facebook last night, after a tornado tore through a Lachute, Quebec. The sudden storm turned a quiet afternoon into a scramble for survival for residents of the community just outside of Montreal, including Lorraine Girard. Ms. Girard was at home taking care of her two young grandchildren, when the wind began to blow. We reached Lorraine Girard at home in La Chute.

JB: Hello, Ms. Girard.

LORRAINE GIRARD: Hello.

JB: When did you first realize that this was going to be something more than just an average summer thunderstorm?

LG: When my windows in my living room started to shake, but very hard. I start to cry because I was with my grandson and my little baby of five months. And I saw the windows shake like this and big boom like this. So I run into the living room and I saw my things go in the wind. Everything was pass away.

JB: This is outside? You're looking outside the window?

LG: Yes. Because when I arrive in my room, I saw things in the windows go right through in the wind.

JB: What did you see?

LG: Wood. The top of the house there…

JB: Yes.

LG: I have that in my swimming pool.

JB: Your roof is in your swimming pool?

LG: Not mine, another one.

JB: Your neighbor's roof?

LG: Yes. it fall down in my yard and my pool. And my gazebo was one and 100 feet in the wind over there.

JB: Your gazebo blew 100 feet away?

LG: Yes. Yes. And my swing outside too. Everything was going.

JB: So did it just happen like in a second? Was it fine and then all of a sudden…

LG: About 30 seconds. 30 seconds and it was all finish.

JB: Wow!

LG: But my yard is finished too.

JB: You said you were taking care of your grandchildren. What were you thinking when all of this was going on?

LG: I was yelling because I was so scared. And my husband tell me to go down the floor and I cannot go down the floor. I was just protecting that little baby and the other one, he is three-years-old, and he was crying because he saw me cry and I was crazy you know. I was sure that we are going to pass with the house too and we're going to die. In my mind that was going to happen.

JB: Now how long did all of this madness last?

LG: 30 Seconds, but it seemed to me like half-an-hour.

JB: Is everyone OK?

LG: Yes, everyone's OK. Somebody came here and he told me that I had maybe 180-kilometer winds in my yard here.

JB: Wow! Now, your grandchildren they must have been shaken up by all of this?

LG: Not the little baby, she’s five months, but the other one. He was crying and he was yelling and he didn't sleep last night. He was with me and he was always crying. He was scared because the house was not moving, but you know the noise that it could make there? I was sure that my house was going to go in the wind too.

JB: Now, describe what your house looks like today and your yard?

LG: Oh, my yard is terrible. Everyone was coming here said oh my god, everything is broke. My big table made of wood is all broke down. I don't have any more thing in my yard.

JB: So how are you feeling today?

LG: I’m in shock today. I'm not there. I'm just looking outside and I cannot believe that's happened here. But my grandson is OK. That's was very important to me that they be OK.

Well, Ms. Girard, I'm happy to hear that everyone is OK and again thank you so much for talking to us.

LG: OK, thank you.

JB: Bye bye now.

LG: Bye.

KG: Lorraine Girard our lives in Lachute, Quebec. We reached her at her home. You can find more on that story on the As It Happens website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Country rock]

Sir John A. school

Guest: Felipe Pareja

KG: He's the first name in prime ministers. But the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario has approved a motion calling for that name — Sir John A. McDonald — to be removed from all schools in the province. The motion describes Canada's first PM as, quote, “the architect of genocide against Indigenous peoples.” Unquote. Felipe Pareja is the teacher who introduced the motion we reached Mr. Pareja in Huntsville, Ontario.

JB: Hello, Mr. Pareja.

FELIPE PAREJA: Hello, Jim.

JB: Why shouldn't Ontario students go to schools named after Sir John A.?

FP: So Jim, this is a conversation that we are having. Really it's a conversation, Jim, that's being had across the country in this age and these times of truth and reconciliation. This is part of a broader conversation about what kinds of things we can do as a society to truly reconcile ourselves as settlers to this land with our Indigenous peoples, with the Indigenous peoples of Turtle Island. And so as a federation, as an elementary teachers’ federation, as the Federation of Ontario, we've passed a resolution at our annual meeting last week to urge school boards to consider changing the names of school buildings or other buildings possibly that are named after Sir John A. McDonald, in recognition of his central role as the architect of really what was genocide of Indigenous Peoples on Turtle Island.

JB: Could you describe the nature of the debate that led to the passing of that resolution? There must have been some dissenting voices in the room?

FP: Certainly, we had speakers lined up throw mics. We had speakers lined up behind con mics. It was by no means unanimous. It was vigorously debated. But when it came time to call for the vote, it did pass. And it passed by a substantial margin based on my sort of reading of the cards that were indicated voting in favor. That's my reading.

JB: Presumably, some of the people there were history teachers. And presumably, someone made the argument that without Sir John A. McDonald, this country probably wouldn't exist. He was he was the father of Confederation. If you can't name a school after Sir John A. McDonald, who can you name a school after?

FP: And not just some people that would have said that Jim. I made those same comments in my comments as I was speaking to the motion. As the mover of the motion, I said as much in my comments. I acknowledged the fact that Sir John McDonald was in fact a father of Confederation that he did play a central role in the Confederation of Canada as we've come to know it today and I'm happy to acknowledge that. My stance on this though, Jim, is that in the same way that we need to or that we should be acknowledging his central role as a father of Confederation and as somebody who is largely responsible for the joining of Canada from coast to coast. We also have to be prepared likewise to attribute some darker elements of our history to him as well. And that project — this project that we call Canada — in its conception, Sir John A. McDonald presided over and directed some pretty awful things to happen to Indigenous peoples of this land. Namely the creation of the Indian residential school system, which we know the Truth and Reconciliation came to the conclusion that it did amount to genocide of Indigenous peoples. He was shown to have starved Indigenous communities along the route of the railway, in order to facilitate its construction and its completion. These are these are terrible things, but in the same way that we are prepared to give him the moniker as you know the, quote/ unquote, “Creator of Canada”, as we've come to know it today, we have to attribute these things to him as well.

JB: Where does it stop? Horrible things have been done by people who we honor on our currency and on our public buildings from the date of Confederation to the present and preceding confederation as well. I mean you mentioned the Indian residential school system. The last residential school didn’t actually shut down until the mid-90s. So does that mean that only prime ministers who have served after Chretien can have schools named after them?

FP: Jim, this is going to the fact that that system was created under Prime Minister Sir John A. McDonald. In addition to having been prime minister at the time, he also occupied a position that we would call today as the Minister of Indigenous or Aboriginal Affairs. This is just largely in recognition of that and it's not dissimilar to the decision made by the federal government recently to rename the Langevin Block in recognition of Hector Louis Langevin’s role in the same project that was the Indian residential school system.

JB: Certainly, both McDonald and Langevin have some similar items on the dark side of the ledger, but doesn't McDonald's list of achievements outweigh that? Can't we acknowledge that those darker elements were there without taking his name off public buildings?

FP: It's funny you say that Jim. I'm in my mid-30s; I'm not too far removed certainly from my days in the classroom as a student. I can tell you with absolute certainty that at no points when it came time to learn about the Confederation of Canada or the fathers of Confederation was any of this part of our history. The Indian residential school system, the Indian Act, the dispossession of land from indigenous people, at no time — at no point — do I remember having sat through a lesson on any of this.

JB: So then perhaps that's where our effort should be aimed right now at improving the curriculum?

FP: Well, and in terms of that, as the Elementary Teachers’ Federation in Ontario, we have a very proud sort of record of in last number of years certainly developing lots of resources for teachers to be able to teach a lot of this history effectively in their classrooms, right? So this is work that we are approaching not just simply from a you know a, quote/unquote, “symbolic perspective” in terms of possibly changing the names of school buildings. This is something that we are firmly invested in seeing the history of this country and this land taught from the wide variety of perspectives that it deserves to be taught from.

JB: I'd just like to return to the question of how far this can go. The high school I went to was named after Sir Wilfred Laurier, who was prime minister when the Asian head tax was imposed. Would you see his name stripped off high schools as well?

FP: To be honest Jim, I don't know. I don't know. Again, this is coming out of a conversation — a broader conversation — that we are having in Canada around truth and reconciliation. And that is something a road that we need to travel that we that I firmly believe that we need to travel together. It's one that cannot be understated. It cannot be minimized. And so you know it's a conversation that we need to have and that we need to continue to have. And I'm fully cognizant, Jim, and I'm fully willing and prepared and happy to admit that this is a contentious question. This is a controversial question. It's difficult, but it doesn't make it any less necessary just because it's difficult.

JB: I’d just like to read you a short quote from Conservative MP Erin O'Toole this is something he tweeted out when he heard about your motion. His quote is, “Embarrassing! A teachers’ union needs a lesson on how to teach history.” What would you say to Mr. O’Toole?

FP: I would say that it's precisely because we as teachers are fully cognizant of the full history. Tend to be fully cognizant of the full history of this country. And that's the reason why we are pushing this motion forward and that we're bringing this forward in the first place. So I would say that it's the furthest thing from embarrassing.

JB: Mr. Pareja, thank you very much for joining us.

FP: Thank you, Jim.

KG: Felipe Pareja teaches core French in Mississauga. He's the sponsor of an Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario motion calling for Sir John A. MacDonald's name to be stripped from provincial school buildings. We reached Mr. Pareja in Huntsville, Ontario.

[Music: Fun piano and violin]

Carl’s Jr. ex-manager

Guest: Andrew Minnes

KG: As a boss, he took a hands-on approach in running his restaurant, which is not always the best idea when you're handling food. The restaurant in question is a Carl's Jr. located in Red Deer, Alberta. Surveillance video footage caught the co-owner there committing some pretty unsavory food safety violations. We called up Andrew Minnes to tell us more. He's an ex-manager at the location who passed the footage along to the CBC. We reached him in Airdrie, Alberta. And a warning that if you are the squeamish type, this is a story that might not be palatable for you.

JB: Hello, Mr. Minnes.

ANDREW MINNES: Hi, how are you Jim?

JB: I am just fine. Now, we've got a few videos here. Could you pick one out and describe it for us? What are we seeing in this kitchen at Carl's Jr.?

AM: Sure. I think probably the one I should probably describe would be the barbecue sauce one. Aswhat we have there we have the owner of the store, instead of using a mixing spoon or a spatula or something other than himself, decided to use his arm and hand to mix barbecue sauce. It’s a six-liter tub, so it's about 24-inches tall and he's sticking his hand in there and mixing it. One of the one of the staff members even approaches him with a mixing spoon while he's doing it sort of to say hey man, you know you need to use this. And I don’t know what he said to him, but he doesn't use it and he mixes it with his hand. He ends up scraping the sauce off of his hand and lower forearm into the tub. And then actually transfers the sauce to another tub also using his hand, which is really bizarre behavior I don't understand.

JB: But just to be clear he is not wearing gloves.

AM: He is not wearing gloves. Whether or not he washed his hands I don't know. We don't know for sure on that end. But either way, it's contact food. It is not food that gets cooked afterwards. It's pretty bizarre. I've been in the industry for roughly 15 years and I've never seen anything like it.

JB: This barbecue sauce video. This wasn't the only violation that you saw. What else did your camera capture?

AM: Well, we saw him do the same thing with honey mustard. We also saw him pick cooked food up off the floor. He made some chicken tenders, went to transfer them to the holding tray, he kind of went with the five second rule and then he put it in the holder presumably to sell. But a really bad one for me is the raw chicken on the handle of the fry basket. So what you're taught is you mix your chicken tenders, right? These are fresh tenders, they’re really good. You mix them in the batter, you put them in the fry basket and then you wash your hands, get a new set of gloves and then you carry the basket with your clean hands to the fryer and dip them in the fryer. Well what he did he would actually take his hand that had the raw chicken on it and the batter on it, carry the basket, push the button on the fryers and now you've got a huge risk for cross-contamination. You can make somebody really sick with raw chicken.

JB: What motivated you to shoot this guy in his kitchen?

AM: I wanted to get the owners and the company to take my accusations seriously. I wanted them to see it themselves. And so I thought well, you know use my phone just filming the monitor in the office so that if when I presented it to the company, representatives or the other owner you know there's validity there, right?

JB: What did the other owner say when he saw what his partner was doing?

AM: He actually didn't want to see the videos. I told him what had gone on and he just sat there. He looked as if he just didn't want to deal with it. I spoke to a Carl’s Jr. representative as well. Nothing was really happening. I ended up quitting the last day of April and I thought about it and I thought you know this guy is still in there. Time went on and I said you know what? This has to get out there.

JB: As you say, you used to work there you don't anymore. What about listeners who are thinking this is just a disgruntled former employee who's releasing these videos out of spite?

AM: Oh, I mean the videos speak for themselves. My response would be does it even matter if I'm disgruntled? Am I disgruntled? to a certain degree. I mean it didn't work out with those guys. You know it is what it is. But, at the end of the day, whether I was disgruntled or not, look at the evidence.

JB: So people who are listening to this tonight, what do you want them to take away from this?

AM: Really pay attention, you know? Like many fast food restaurants, that Carl’s Jr. and Carl’s Jr.’s and I just want to say as well I've been to other stores in Alberta and I haven't seen this type of thing.

JB: But how do you how do you pay attention? How do you know what's going on behind the kitchen with your barbecue sauce when you're sitting at a table waiting for your meal to be served?

AM: Well, in that particular case there's nothing you can do. Read the signals as much as you can. Just pay attention as much as you can. And like I said, if you're getting if you're getting sloppy service or you feel like the person taking your order isn't really paying attention or doesn't care it's probably because they don't.

JB: Now, these are these are disturbing videos that you've shared with us today. What do you say to people who might just be scared or fast food altogether?

AM: I wouldn't blanket all fast food. I would really, really specify this particular restaurant. You know I'm in Airdrie, I've gone to the McDonald's here a couple of times. I really watched them. As a manager, it’s just what I do when I go to a restaurant. I pay attention. And they do a really good job. You know Carl’s Jr. as a company does have high standards. I went through the training procedure. I spent 10 weeks in California going through the entire training procedure, including food safety, including everything. And I got all of my supervisors as well to get food safety as per their recommendation. So I wouldn't indict the company. I wouldn't indict the fast food industry, but I certainly would pay attention to that particular location.

JB: Andrew Minnes, thanks for joining us.

AM: Thank you so much, Jim.

KG: Andrew Minnes is an ex-manager of a Carl's Jr. franchise in Red Deer, Alberta. We reached him in Airdrie. Carl's Jr. has told the CBC that the co-owner in question, Jack Webb, has been temporarily banned from working in his restaurant's kitchen. The company also said, quote, “improper food handling behavior is unacceptable, and in no way represents Carl's Jr’s commitment to safe food handling.” Unquote.

Back To Top »

Part 2: Kim Wall obit, missile shield MP, India divorce ruling

Kim Wall obit

Guest: Coleen Jose

KG: Today, Danish investigators confirmed the worst: that a torso found earlier this week on a beach by Copenhagen was that of Kim Wall. The Swedish freelance journalist disappeared earlier this month, after boarding a submarine belonging to an inventor named Peter Madsen. Mr. Madsen has since been charged with manslaughter. Colleen Jose is a friend of Kim Wall. They attended journalism school at Columbia University together, and later traveled to the Marshall Islands to work on a story. We reached Ms. Jose in Tulum, Mexico.

JB: Hello, Ms. Jose.

COLEEN JOSE: Hi.

JB: Let me just start by saying how sorry I am about the loss of your friend.

CJ: Thank you. We’re all devastated.

JB: What have the last few days been like for you?

CJ: We found out Friday morning last week. And the last few days have been pretty uncertain in terms of the evidence that has been made public, as well as recent news as you've seen of the body that was found.

JB: It's like every day there's a new element to the story.

CJ: There is yeah. And we're trying to focus more on her life and legacy now beyond the details that have so many unanswered questions.

JB: Now, I understand that you're in a group — a chat group — with a bunch of classmates. What have you all been talking about since the disappearance?

CJ: So the group grew from about six to eight people to what is now about 80 or so, mainly consisting of our class at Columbia from the 2013 class. In the beginning, we spoke about details as to her disappearance and any new information that came about. And we are now just sharing pictures and memories of her from different parts of the world that we've known her from. Kim traveled the world incessantly as a foreign correspondent for major news publications. And it's a collection of that work as well as the moments that we shared with her, including her singing karaoke or the two of us on the nuclear waste site, reporting on an atoll in the Marshall Islands.

JB: I understand one of the members of the group spoke to Kim right before she went on the submarine.

CJ: She did. She was Whatsapp messaging with her. And at a point a few hours into the trip, she stopped responding.

JB: When was the last time you spoke with Kim?

CJ: Well, we spoke through Whatsapp about three or so weeks ago. We were still coordinating publication of our four part multimedia series on the Marshall Islands and the diaspora in the U.S. That has published for the German publications Suddeutsche Zeiting and the Guardian. And we had still been working on publishing it for an English language publication.

JB: And what can you tell our listeners about Kim? What was she like?

CJ: It's hard to put it into a few words, but she is one of the most talented journalists I've ever met and worked with. As a friend, I admired her critical thinking about the world. She told human stories for incredibly complex issues that spanned generations or governmental agencies in a very human way. And she found commonalities and those connections for a global audience.

JB: Now, this Marshall Islands piece you worked on that together for quite a long time.

CJ: Yup, we're six weeks in the Marshall Islands, two weeks in Arkansas and nearly a year for post-production.

JB: What was that like?

CJ: It was challenging. We were young journalists and we cobbled together a few grants to allow us to get there without any of the proper insurance or support that journalists would get from a major publication. It was challenging, but we were there to tell the story of this island nation that’s suffering both from climate change effects and the U.S. nuclear legacy on the island, which is mainly nuclear testing from the Cold War era. There are a lot of memories for sure.

JB: Every piece I've read about Kim has highlighted how far she goes for her stories.

CJ: Yeah, and she didn't just go far for those stories. They're all very meaningful. And she was also trained in hostile environment settings, as well as other hostile situations. She was prepared and cautious.

JB: Now, obviously, we don't know what happened to Kim Wall. And nothing's been proven in court. But one thing that people have been pointing out over the past couple of days is how her story highlights some of the issues around the safety of female freelance journalists. What are your thoughts on that?

CJ: Having been one, I could say that she was just doing her job. And, unfortunately, it was so close to home. Whereas she has traversed the globe and reported in the most remote places that most people in their lives wouldn’t ever arrive in. I think the industry has enabled it in a sense. And the learning curve has unfortunately been through situations like this, including James Foley's case, that we pay attention and become more conscious of the lack of security, the lack of training and the lack of stipends and supports that publications don't invest in.

JB: Now we've talked about what Kim was like as a journalist. What was she like as a friend?

CJ: She has a lot of fun. After the Marshall Islands, we would lay out all the chapters. And for her parties in Brooklyn, she would project images of palm trees and tropical creatures. She had a knack for the quirky things in life and stories. She had the best knit sweaters from Sweden and elsewhere in the world, amazing style and always wore her hair in a top knot, messy bun before it was a thing or before it was cool. She was hilarious.

JB: Ms. Jose, once again, we're so sorry about the loss of your friend. And we appreciate the time you've taken to talk to us today. Thank you.

CJ: Thanks for telling her story.

JB: Goodbye now.

CJ: Thanks.

That was Coleen Jose, a friend and former classmate of Swedish journalist Kim Wall. We reached her in Tulum, Mexico. And if you'd like to hear more on that story, visit our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient]

Missile shield MP

Guest: Mark Gerretsen

KG: It's been more than a decade since Canada debated joining a U.S. ballistic missile defense shield, and ultimately declined. But in light of the threat posed by North Korea, that debate is being revisited. Yesterday, the House of Commons Defense Committee agreed to discuss the North Korean threat and the U.S. ballistic missile defense system. It plans to hear from various experts in the coming weeks. Mark Gerretsen is a Liberal MP, and a member of that committee. He believes it might be time for Canada to reconsider joining a ballistic missile defense shield. We reached Mr. Gerretsen in Kingston, Ontario.

JB: Hello, Mr. Garretsen.

MARK GERRETSEN: Hi there. How are you?

JB: I'm just fine thanks. Why are you now open to exploring the idea of joining the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense System?

MG: This is something that the Defense Committee had discussed and explored on a number of occasions. One of the recommendations of the Defense Committee made during the defense review was that Canada at least look at what its role might be in the future with respect to the BMD program. So you know I should also say, and to make myself absolutely clear, all that I've said to this point is that I think we should be having a discussion about it. You know that's what our committee of Parliament does. The defense committee specifically is talking about the various different strategies that might exist to defend North America.

JB: Because of what's been happening in North Korea?

MG: I think that what's been going on in North Korea is really putting Canada's defense on the minds of a lot of Canadians. I think that Canadians are worried about what those protections would look like that Canada has. And you know that's probably one of the reasons why the opposition brought forward to our committee the request to have a discussion about this and how we got to where we are now.

JB: Now they call this a “shield”. Can you describe how it works?

MG: I mean, basically, I think that the premise is that you know it's the defense of North America as it relates to incoming aerial threats. You know it's important to point out that the government, through its defense policy review, has indicated that it wants to actually go a step further than just looking at how do you defend against airborne threats? They're saying how do we defend against any kind of potential threat? And that would include air, but it would also include water or land threats. And where we're kind of going with this isn't that far off from where the government is currently going and what their direction is.

JB: But aren't we already covered under the terms of NATO and NORAD? Don't we already get the protection of the shield?

MG: Well, I mean we're definitely part of NORAD. But Canada did not sign on back in 2005 to be part of the actual protection part — the defense part as it relates to ballistic missiles.

JB: Currently, if the U.S. Ballistic Missile Defense Shield picked up a missile heading towards Canada, what would happen?

MG: Well, I mean I don't know and I think that's the whole issue is that we don't really know what would happen. And it would be up to the Americans, who are controlling that system, to make that decision. You know I think that a lot of the questions that you're asking will come as a result of the committee having a discussion about this and looking into what Canada's role would be in that.

JB: Now, your fellow liberal MP and the Chair of the Committee, Steven Fuhr, he says that this country only has limited resources for the military and that North Korea doesn't pose much of a threat to us. And given that this missile defense system has been described as basically a giant money suck, costing billions and billions of dollars. To this day, we're not even really sure if it works. Doesn't that concern you?

MG: It certainly does. We need to find out you know how reliable is it? What exactly does it cost? You know these are the answers to the questions that I've raised by talking about having a discussion about it.

JB: But isn't that the discussion we had back in 2005? And didn't that end with us saying no thanks?

MG: Absolutely. And that was 12 years ago and things change over time, right? And I mean we've had a couple of governments since then, or at least one and onto another one. We're seeing you know new things happen in the world. People are asking new questions and it's important to always be revisiting these things and confirming that previous decisions were the best decisions that were made and how to move forward.

JB: And, of course, we're not the only country with a different government in place since 2005. What do you think about the challenges that might come with working alongside the Trump administration on an issue like defending North America from North Korea?

MG: Oh well, one of the things that I can tell you that you know I've really been impressed with in my experience of watching how Canadians and Americans work together, in particular when it comes to interactions through military, is that it is quite exceptional to see Canadians and Americans working side by side. The committee had a trip to the NORAD headquarters just over a year ago. And to see how the Americans and Canadians worked side by side for the best interest of everybody in North America, in particular Canada the United States, is extremely exceptional to see that. You know I don't think that the politics really play when it comes to how those folks look at what they see as the best options forward for the protection of North America. And I think that that's the important thing to underscore here is how well the troops work together and respect each other and work collaboratively. You know that's what stands the test of time. You know two three four administrations from now, those are the relationships that will still be the strong relationships that link the two countries together. The politicians, we come and go.

JB: No doubt you're right. But one politician who has come in hasn't yet gone is Donald Trump. I'm just wondering wouldn't it be more effective and a lot cheaper rather than investing into this ballistic missile defense system to just say loudly we're not with him?

MG: Listen, you know that's not within the scope of what our committee is setting right now, especially as it relates to the protection of North America. That's for other politicians to I guess weigh in on and make decisions. What our committee is discussing right now is how to properly protect Canada? How do you properly make sure all the correct measures are put in place? You know this is not a political exercise to shut down other politicians or how do we use this as a political tool or anything to that degree. We genuinely look for opportunities to bring good policy forward. So I mean I'm not really in a position to weigh in right now as to you know the current administration in the United States and how that plays into something that I don't particularly see as something that really does get in the way of these kind of relationships that we have.

JB: So you're saying you're not willing to start an international incident on national radio?

MG: [Sound: Laughing] nor do I think it's my position to do that.

JB: Mr. Gerretsen, Thanks for taking our call.

MG: Thanks a lot for having me.

KG: Mark Gerretsen is a Liberal MP, and a member of the House of Commons Defense Committee. We reached Mr. Gerretsen in Kingston, Ontario.

[Music: Sad piano]

India divorce ruling

Guest: Vandana Shah

KG: It is being called a historic day for Muslim women in India. The country's top court has suspended the practice of “triple talaq”, which allowed Muslim men to instantly divorce their wives. Vandana Shah is a divorce lawyer in Mumbai. That's where we reached her.

JB: Hello, Ms. Shah

VANDANA SHAW: Hi. Good evening. How are you?

JB: I am just fine. Now this ruling, some of the judges on the court called triple talaq “un-islamic”, “arbitrary”, even “unconstitutional”. Just how significant is this decision?

VS: I think you know this decision is going to change the ecosystem of the Muslim personal law in India as we know it. It ends the arbitrary, undemocratic use of using our methodology of divorce, which anyways was against human rights. Let me just tell you what the what the triple talaq is about. Essentially, all the rest of us, except the Muslims in India, have to go to court to seek a divorce. It's only the Muslims who have the option of following a religious form of divorce in India, whereby the husband can say talaq thrice. Talaq, essentially, loosely translated means “divorce”. And it means I divorce thee, I divorce thee, I divorce thee. And the divorce is done. Now, Jim, I would have been perfect with this if the women had the same right. But, unfortunately, the women had to make the long trudge to the family court in India. But for the men, it was not to be. So the men had the unequivocal right of using the triple talaq as a form of divorce, but not so for the women.

JB: And this has been legally recognized, not just culturally accepted, but actually legally recognized?

VS: Absolutely. It's not one of those mom and pop kind of decrees, which you say that you know somebody in the village has granted it and hence it should be accepted. This is a legally-recognized form of talaq. And, in fact, currently I have two clients who are Muslims, who unfortunately have been the victims of this. You know one of them stays pretty close to where I stay, which is a fairly urban locality. What happened is that she's an educated girl and she goes in to use the gymnasium in the morning. She comes back. When she came back, all her husband asked her was: did you check your messages? And she says no. And he says I've sent you a text divorcing you. And her first thought was that she told me my first thought was maybe he's joking. And then I asked him where are the children? He said I've already sent them to your parents place, so you need to move out. You know now what goes through a woman's mind at that point of time is basically a lot of what do I do now? And I'm totally helpless because this form of divorce was legally valid in India.

JB: It's almost mind boggling that this would be going on in India in 2017.

VS: Absolutely, you know? And I'm really glad that it has been abolished or banned, whatever terminology you'd like to use because about 20 other countries have already banned the triple talaq. And in between you know there are about five or seven years ago, there were a lot of murmurs about the triple talaq. But, unfortunately, those died down. And India, as you know, is an evolving country and we have too many other things going on. So I think it just went away to the backburner. But now, it's up front and it's in your face, you know? So it's kind of really barbaric how we could let it continue for that long. And you know for Christ's sake, we are on our 70th year of independence and you know you can be trampling women's rights like this in this day and age.

JB: So I can understand the shock that your client expressed to you, but what about after the shock ends? What kind of effect does it have on women in the weeks and months and years that follow?

VS: Absolutely. You know there is this whole sense of helplessness. And although divorce in India is still very stigmatized, and you know our are divorce rates are fairly low, only about 13 in 1000. So although the divorce rates are low, divorce is stigmatized. So everybody has kind of a “why me syndrome”? But for the Muslim women, it's also now where do I go? Because if this form of divorce is recognized I have no legal recourse per say. So you are subjected to so much of not only a social ridicule, but also a forced acceptance. That's why I said it's unilateral and it's unequivocal. And then what happens also to your financial situation? Essentially, all other laws in India do provide for let's say the Hindu Marriage Act. And I’m quoting the Hindu Marriage Act because most of the marriages do fall under the ambit of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955. And, essentially, what happens is there is a provision for interim maintenance. There is a provision for alimony. There is a provision for child support, which all of that has got lost in the triple talaq. So the women have no recourse to maintenance, except the initial maintenance that they get, which is you can call it a form of a contract marriage. But you know that is essentially it's just pennies.

JB: Now, you mentioned your client who received a text message from her husband. And I've heard stories on the BBC that some women have received triple talaqs over Whatsapp, over Skype, letters, all sorts of delivery methods.

VS: And also neighbor’s telephones. I had someone mentioning to me and these are not mentions as hearsay. I heard, she said, I meant, these are people who I know who have experienced this, you know? Where this lady's husband called her from Saudi and he didn't call on her phone, he called on the neighbor's phone and asked his wife to come and she was in a state of shock. I just think that, Jim, how were we ever accepting this?

JB: This ruling is a six month suspension of the practice of triple talaq. So what happens next?

VS: Well you know after six months, there will be a law passed, which essentially bans triple talaq. And you know and I'm very confident that such a law will get passed.

JB: Ms. Shah, thank you very much for joining us.

VS: Thank you very much for having me.

KG: Vandana Shah is a divorce lawyer in Mumbai. That's where we reached her. For more on that story, visit our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Rock]

Sound of the Day: BBC Pidgin

KG: You're probably used to the BBC sounding like this.

SOUNDCLIP

REPORTER: Norfolk police have increased patrols in the seaside town of Cromer, after an outbreak of what they've described as low-level disorder over the weekend.

KG: But as of this week, you can hear that same story on the BBC sounding like this.

SOUNDCLIP

[Speaking: Pidgin]

KG: That's a sample of the 30th language added to the BBC's World Service: Pidgin. The addition is part of the largest expansion of the world's service since the 1940s. Pidgin is a mixture of English and local languages, which allows people who don't share a common tongue to communicate. It's spoken by an estimated 75 million people in Nigeria alone. Here's a clip from tonight's new daily BBC program “Pidgin Minute”. It's our Sound of the Day.

SOUNDCLIP

[Speaking: Pidgin]

KG: That's our Sound of the Day. A clip from the new daily BBC program “Pidgin Minute”, launched this week by the BBC World Service.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

August 23, 2017 episode transcript

More Stories Like This