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 2018

The AIH Transcript for February 14, 2018

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight:

GILLIAN FINDLAY: Now for a plan BB. So far, Benjamin Netanyahu’s strategy is to refuse to step down, after police recommend he faces charges of bribery and fraud. But our guest says this time, the Israeli prime minister's resilience may fail him.

JD: One of its nicknames is “America's comeback city”. And while it's too early to say whether that's true, one activist considers it a victory that Baltimore just went 11 days without a homicide.

GF: Breaking news, instead of fixing it Toronto Star top guy John Honderich says that his papers latest wave of cuts wouldn't have happened if the Trudeau government were truly committed to quality independent journalism.

JD: Some children left behind. Six families challenged the Canada Revenue Agency for denying their Canadian-born kids child benefits because their parents’ immigration status is still in flux mandates best friend.

GF: Mandates best friend. Kansas has oddly lax laws about who can run for governor. But even with is sure to be popular pro-treats, anti squirrel platform, Angus the dog will not be among this year's candidates.

JD: And… bring whom the bacon? The right six digits won a New Hampshire woman a lottery worth more than half-a-billion U.S. dollars. Now, she's fighting to get the money without giving up her identity.

JD: As It Happens, the Wednesday edition. radio that hope she finds safety despite numbers.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Part one: Netanyahu allegations, newspaper funding, trans breastfeeding

Netanyahu allegations

Guest: Yoaz Hendel

JD: Benjamin Netanyahu did not earn the nickname "the Magician" for nothing. Israel's Prime Minister has a knack for pulling rabbits from his hat in the face of serious political turmoil. This week, however, may require his most challenging trick yet. He's refusing to step down, in the face of recommendations from Israeli Police that he be charged with bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. At a press conference today, Prime Minister Netanyahu was defiant. Here's what he said, with help from translators at BBC.

SOUNDCLIP

BENAMIN NETANYAHU: [Speaking: Arabic]

TRANSLATOR: After reading the police recommendations I can say that it's a biased, extreme document full of holes like Swiss cheese, and it doesn't hold water. I want to, first of all, reassure you the coalition is stable. No one, not I, not anyone else has plans to go to an election. We will continue to work with you for the good of Israel's citizens until the end of the term.

JD: That was Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking at a press conference today, with translation from the BBC. Yoaz Hendel is the former communications director for Prime Minister Netanyahu. We reached Mr. Hendel in Jerusalem.

GF: Mr. Hendel, we've just heard a little bit of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s press conference today calling the corruption allegations against him full of holes like Swiss cheese. What did you make as you listened to your former boss today?

YOAZ HENDEL: I would say that there are two different lines. One of them is the political, which Netanyahu is quite experienced in managing he's own coalition partners, knows how to convince the Israelis to vote for him time after time. And there is another dimension, which is his personal dimension, which became very crucial in the last 24 hours. What you hear today is the challenges that the police put on the table and the fact that he's having the battle of his life.

GF: Is this the end of his political life do you think — the beginning of the end?

YH: It will be very hard to predict what's going to happen with Netanyahu. But I would say that this is one of the most problematic, challenging days in his political career. And since Netanyahu has a very strong historian consciousness, I would say that he understands that he might find himself one day in the same position that the former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert found himself in, which means that in one second, the Israeli public opinion deletes your own achievements, experience, and history. And I think that Netanyahu thinks about it and understands deeply how important what’s happening now.

GF: I just want to remind people what the allegations are against him: bribery and fraud. One case involves his receipt of valuable gifts from international billionaires. In one case at least, he is accused of having in return provided Israeli tax breaks, and apparently, some help obtaining a U.S. visa. And then the second case involves newspapers. The allegation is that he held secret talks with the publisher of one Israeli newspaper, requesting positive coverage, and in exchange, he was prepared to hurt a competitor. That again is just the allegation. The police have said that they think this should move to indictment. It's now up to the Attorney-General. What's going to happen next?

YH: Next is actually the battle of the Israeli public opinion. We are now having one year of I would say political warfare inside Israel. And at the same time, hard decisions of Avichai Mandelblit…

GF: He's the Attorney-General, so it's up to him now to decide whether to actually go to ahead?

YH: Not only up to him, there is a huge team that deal with those allegations. Since most of the evaluation is talking about one year, we are now going to see Netanyahu coping with the Israeli public opinion, convincing his own electoral base.

GF: It's going to take one year for the Attorney-General to decide whether or not to go ahead?

YH: More-or-less because this is a long process. We might be surprised and find ourselves in a few months. But this is I would say the maximum period.

GF: I want to ask you about that about the Attorney-General Avichai Mandelblit, because as I understand it, he once served in Mr. Netanyahu’s government — he was appointed the Attorney General by Prime Minister Netanyahu — how could he possibly make an independent decision on this?

YH: And we have a strong debate domestically if this is the right way to shape this position because, on one side, you are actually the one that's supposed to advise the government. And on the other side, you are responsible to find the allegations against the different ministers or the prime minister in this case, if there is something. So it's a kind of unique position.

GF: Is there confidence that he can be independent?

YH: Look, we saw it in the past, and it worked. Now I know that there are many people in Israel that accuse him of being one of Netanyahu’s team, and not independent. But, at the end of the day, I trust him, and I think that since we have many checks and balances. As I said, he is not the only one to decide. There is the police, and there is the team, and there are other attorneys working for him, and Netanyahu knows that.

GF: Today, Mr. Netanyahu reassured people, he said that the coalition that keeps his government afloat is stable, he's not worried about political allies abandoning him. It's still early days though. Do you expect that that is going to change over the days and weeks to come?

YH: Actually yes, because we already heard on of his coalition members said that Netanyahu is a great leader politically, he is a statesman. But in the same sentence, he also said that it's unacceptable to have a politician or leader that gets gifts from billionaires. This is only the first day. Everything depends on the public opinion, on the polls, and Netanyahu’s story is going to be the next story of the election.

GF: You mentioned earlier Ehud Olmert, he was the former Israeli prime minister a decade ago, who came under police investigation. And, at the time, also faced calls to step down. Among the loudest calls back then was from the opposition leader Mr. Netanyahu. Clearly, there's a bit of hypocrisy going on here. Do you think that's going to harm him?

YH: You're right. There is hypocrisy, and you can hear voices that a few years ago told the prime minister to resign. And today they are supporting Netanyahu. But, at the same time, one should also remember that Ehud Olmert had very small support inside the public opinion. I think that it's not only about his political career, but it's about how Netanyahu is going to be remembered in the history books of Israel.

GF: It's hard to imagine the end of a Netanyahu era. You said that you can never count him out. He's got the nickname of “the Magician”. Does he have one magic trick left that can help him survive?

YH: Look, Netanyahu is a magician. And, at the same time, he has a lot of luck always. At the same time, I think that we are in a different story. The legal challenges facing the state of Israel, and personally, I think that might change his ability to create new tricks.

GF: Mr. Hendel, I appreciate your time today. Thanks so much.

YH: Thank you very much.

JD: Yoaz Hendel is the former communications director for Prime Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. We reached Mr. Hendel in Jerusalem.

[Music: Jazz]

Newspaper funding

Guest: John Honderich

JD: The prime minister was forced to defend his government's commitment to independent journalism this afternoon. The Toronto Star has just announced yet another round of cuts. That prompted this question from NDP member Tracey Ramsey.

SOUNDCLIP

TRACEY RAMSEY: Today is another sad day for journalism. The Toronto Star has laid off over 50 people. The news media is undergoing unprecedented changes, yet the Minister of Canadian Heritage has not acted on the recommendations from either her commission report, or the parliamentary committee report. Months have passed and job losses are a daily occurrence in the media. How many consultations reports and recommendations will it take for the government to decide to do something, even on a single recommendation?

SPEAKER: The honourable prime minister.

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: Mr. Speaker, reliable, local, and community news is essential for the functioning of our democracy. For example, we've invested 675 million dollars in CBC Radio Canada that then turned around and introduced journalists into areas where they had never been served before. We're also modernizing the Canada Periodical Fund to ensure that it’s meeting the needs of local news and magazines, including in the transition to digital. We know there is more to do, and we will continue to work with our valued friends and partners in the media to ensure they can continue to do their job of holding the democracy to account and informing citizens.

JD: That was Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, answering a question from NDP member Tracey Ramsey this afternoon. John Honderich is the Chair of the Toronto Star's parent company, Torstar. We reached Mr. Honderich in Toronto.

GF: Mr. Honderich, you heard the prime minister, he speaks of his valued friends and partners in the media. How value do you feel by his government today?

JOHN HONDERICH: I've written columns and said things, and I would concur with the question that of all the recommendations that have come forward from the reports that they commissioned, from the public policy forum, and also from the Heritage Committee, they haven't acted on one of them.

GF: And what does that tell you?

JH: Well, if he's that concerned about it, then I would have thought that might have been the basis for action. His one quote was, of course, the 675 for the CBC. That, in fact, he's done, but that was something totally separate that was an election promise. But nothing else and I've laid out all the recommendations across the board, many of which don't require any money at all. And they haven't moved on any of them.

GF: And here today, we find ourselves with more cuts. Tell me about the cuts you had to make today?

JH: The cuts are across the company in various departments. I know the ones that are generating a lot of commentary on Twitter et cetera. We had one of the best internship programs in the country, we've been forced to put that on suspension, we've cut travel; we've cut back on a whole lot of expenses. We've we quite frankly are trying to do our very best to save the young reporters who we have, but every other thing going we've gotten rid of.

GF: The business model doesn't work anymore. I think we all understand that. And today, the Heritage Minister said, yet again, that she has no interest in bailing out non-viable business models. So what argument do you make that you are viable?

JH: One can look at film in this country; one can look at TV production, one can look at magazines in this country. They all receive government subsidies. I sat next to Heather Conway, your ultimate boss, Gillian, and she said we wouldn't survive without the government grants. Does that make the CBC a viable business model? What about Maclean’s Magazine, which gets two million dollars from the Periodical Fund? It wouldn't survive without that. Does that make them a successful business model? In the past newspapers haven't needed any support. We're at a period where we are clearly going through a transformation. And my question is while this transformation is going through, where is the quality journalism going to come from? And if we view that as being critical to our country, and if we view that as critical to our democracy, then perhaps the government should be involved in trying to help.

GF: How much of your situation today do you fairly say was self-inflicted? You made critical business decisions like the millions that were invested in the Star tablet, which basically, you took a risk, provided all your content for free at a time when others were putting up paywalls. Was that a mistake?

JH: In retrospect, yes it was. I can say, Gillian, I mean that model is used by La Presse in Quebec to great success. And it was a very successful model, and we did a lot of testing et cetra and thought it would work here. It turned out it didn’t. We invested a lot; we gave it a good go it was a mistake. I guess as you're going through transformations and you're trying things out, you can't be afraid of failure. We thought it would work. It hasn't.

GF: You talked, John, as well about the importance of quality journalism, and I don't think anybody would disagree that. But you know the purveyors of quality journalism in the United States, for instance, are doing quite well. You know the New York Times and Washington Post they’ve found an audience is prepared to pay for quality journalism. Why can't that happen here?

JH: I think, and as I've said in an article, we have to all try and work and see if a paywall can work and do? I can tell you the Washington Post and New York Times, which have done extraordinarily well and it's referred to as the “Trump bump” and the demand for real news and real analysis of what's going on in the greatest story of the century has given them an incredible value as they go forward. We haven't got the same phenomenon happening here. The success rate of paywalls et cetra so far in this country that people have tried it has not been great. There are too many free competitors, including www.cbc.ca, a government-subsidized website, which is the greatest competitor to Canadian newspapers.

GF: Is there a viable model anywhere that you can point to that would give people some hope? I mean besides Google and besides Facebook, which now have 70 per cent of digital advertising. Is there a model that you would point to say look, with the funding, we can do this?

JH: By the way, and in terms of helping and assistance, we're talking transition. We're not talking permanent; we're talking transition.

GF: But transition to what?

JH: To a successful model, you're right. And the successful models are the ones you pointed out to: the New York Times. And the New York Times just released the information on their digital subscribers, and it's extraordinary. But you know we also have a federal government that seems to be enamored of Facebook and Google. They don't pay sales tax, they take 70 per cent of the ad, and what they contribute to the journalism process of this country? What do they contribute to our democracy?

GF: Thirteen days from now, Mr. Honderich, there will be a federal budget. What kind of help are you looking for?

JH: Well, there are about 20 recommendations in the reports that the government commissioned itself. And any combination — or any one of those recommendations — would be excellent. There are some models there that would see Canadian Press perhaps supporting local journalism. They've talked about changing the copyright definitions that would help us in terms of protecting intellectual property. Any one of them would be helpful. As I said, up to this point, we've had zero.

GF: If you don't come away from that budget a happy man, what is going to happen to the Toronto Star? You've been quoted as saying we are very, very close to the end?

JH: What I'm saying is we are now in the process of a transformation program. We have a new CEO. We have a plan; we are putting the building blocks in place. We're trying to make some announcements shortly. We haven't given up; we're still going to keep on trying. But as you point out, to find those successful models has been very difficult. We think we have a new plan, we think this will work, and we shall see.

GF: John Honderich, thanks so much for joining us today.

JH: All right. Thank you.

GF: Bye bye.

JH: Bye.

JD: John Honderich is the chair of Torstar, parent company of the Toronto Star. We reached Mr. Honderich in Toronto.

[Music: Orchestral]

Trans breastfeeding

Guest: Tamar Reiseman

JD: There's was a ground-breaking new case report in the journal Transgender Health, which describes how a thirty-year-old transgender woman was able to breastfeed her baby. It is the first-ever case of induced lactation in a trans woman to be documented in academic literature. Dr. Tamar Reiseman is the physician who helped the patient to lactate. Dr. Reiseman is with Mount Sinai's Center for Transgender Medicine and Surgery in New York City. That's where we reached her.

GF: Dr. Reiseman, tell us about this patient? What was her request when she came to you?

TAMAR REISEMAN: So this was a patient whose partner was pregnant. And so the patient was interested in breastfeeding shortly after the child arrived.

GF: And when she said this, did you think this was possible?

TR: So I was pretty frank with the patient, I said that I hadn't personally done this before; that I wasn't sure it was possible. But that I would look into it for her. And when I did my research, what I found was there was actually a small but available literature for what's called non-puerperal lactation, basically meaning breastfeeding that doesn't follow a pregnancy in cisgender women. And so by sort of taking some of those protocols we were able to modify them and apply them for our patient.

GF: So I understand that this woman had, in fact, been on hormonal therapy for some period leading up to this point, right?

TR: Yes. So that's sort of important to understand. This was a woman who had been taking estrogen and progesterone for several years. And for several years, she had been on a medication to block her testosterone. At the time that I first saw her, she had essentially fully-formed breasts.

GF: And so what did you do then? What was the therapy going forward?

TR: So the gist of the protocol was essentially to create a hormonal profile that sort of mimics the hormonal profile of pregnancy and then to reduce her hormones to sort of mimic delivery. And the last piece of that was to help increase her prolactin level, which is a hormone that's very important for breast milk production.

GF: And over what time period were you doing this?

TR: So that took place over a couple of months.

GF: And then I guess the baby arrives?

TR: Yes.

GF: And what happens.

TR: So for six weeks, the patient was breastfeeding exclusively. That was the exclusive source of nourishment for that child. But, unfortunately, at six weeks or so, there was concern about a lack of breast milk volume. And so, at that point, the patient moving forward, continued to breastfeed, but also supplemented with formula.

GF: What did it mean for this couple — for this woman in particular — to be able to do that?

TR: So I am a little bit hesitant to try to speak for the patient. I know her privacy is really important to her. But we were happy that we were able to help her achieve her goal.

GF: I mean what was it like that moment when you realized that this trans woman was lactating?

TR: We were really excited. You were excited for the patient that we were able to help her achieve her goal. And we were really excited that we were able to publish it in an academic journal. You know it's really important to sort of understand that transgender endocrinology is really, really young as a subspecialty. And any time we can contribute to the academic literature, help patients make medical decisions based on data, and contribute to the standardization of care, we're really excited.

GF: How big a deal is this? I mean what might this mean for other trans parents?

TR: It's a big deal for us.

GF: But does it have application beyond this one couple?

TR: Sure. So, of course, you know not everyone wants to breastfeed, not everyone can breastfeed, not everyone has to breastfeed. But definitely for the women who do and for the transgender women who do, we're happy to be able to offer that as an option. We see it as you know just one more part of helping to build happy, healthy transgender families.

GF: And do you think is there an application beyond transgendered people?

TR: Sure, so there’s already a small body of literature that that describes the, again, ability to induce lactation — functional lactation, right? Meaning lactation that's productive for breastfeeding in let's say adoptive cisgender women. So that ability has been documented, but definitely any time you know it's in it's out there, it's in the media, people are talking about it somewhere, there will likely be cisgender women who maybe have always wanted to breastfeed, but didn't know that it was possible. You know so maybe there are some cisgender women out there who maybe will now breastfeed as a result of this news.

GF: All right. Dr. Reiseman, thanks so much.

TR: Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

JD: Dr. Tamar Reiseman is a physician with Mount Sinai's Center for Transgender Medicine and Surgery in New York City. That's where we reached her.

[Music: World music]

Leatherback turtle

JD: It's an endangered reptile that should be hanging out, as perhaps we all wish we could be, in a much warmer place. But along the Bras D'Or Lake on Cape Breton Island, Ron MacLean came home last week to find a giant leatherback turtle frozen into the ice near his home. Yesterday, with some help, he chiseled the disoriented creature out. Here is Mr. MacLean talking to associate producer Nicole MacLennan today, on "Information Morning Cape Breton".

SOUNDCLIP

RON MACLEAN: It looked like there was an overturned boat — a small overturned boat on the shore. I went to look, and it was a leatherback turtle. And then this morning, a DFO was down with a couple of the guys, and they went back and got what they needed, and we got it out.

NICOLE MACLENNAN: And about how big is it?

RM: From tip to tail, it measures 83 inches — just short of seven feet. And measuring the shell from one side to the other around, it was three feet.

NM: How did you manage to get it out?

RM: Oh, with a couple of come-alongs and a cover off of a big cooler. We got it under the turtle, and we pulled it out onto the ice, and then we dragged it over where we could give it up closer to shore. And I pulled it onto a pallet, and with the tractor with the bucket, I put some forks on it, and we lifted it up and brought it up.

NM: how unusual is it for there to be a leatherback turtle in the Bras D’Or?

RM: Some people have said they'd seen a leatherback turtle, but there is no ever record sighting or finding one at all anywhere in the Bras D’Or lakes. They’re supposed to be in the Caribbean about now, see laying eggs; not up here.

JD: We should all be in the Caribbean right about now. That was Ron MacLean, speaking to CBC Cape Breton about the 360-kilogram sea turtle that he found frozen in the ice near his home.

Back To Top »

Part two: Baltimore ceasefire, New Hampshire lottery mystery, Encore: Bere Island lottery

Baltimore ceasefire

Guest: Erricka Bridgeford

JD: On February 2nd, something unusual happened in Baltimore. Or, more to the point I suppose, something didn't happen: on February 2nd, no one was killed, nor the next day, nor the day after that. In fact, for 11 full days, Baltimore had no recorded homicides. That's its longest streak since 2014. The streak is especially remarkable because in 2017, Baltimore set a new record for yearly homicides, with 343. In response to the violence, last year, local activist Erricka Bridgeford began organizing community ceasefire weekends. The latest peaceful streak began with the third ceasefire weekend. It ended with a fatal shooting yesterday afternoon. We reached Erricka Bridgeford in Annapolis, Maryland.

GF: Ms. Bridgeford, the ceasefire held from February 2^nd, first for a weekend, and then day after day, and eventually for 11 days. As you saw the day's rack up, how did you feel?

ERRICKA BRIDGEFORD: It was very exciting to see. Just to know that nobody's family got a phone call that they lost somebody to violence. And so people are being traumatized, people were not planning funerals this week. And then it really gave this city a sense of hope. A lot of people had given up on Baltimore, so it gave people a sense of hope and renewed self-esteem.

GF: And then it ended yesterday with the death of a 22-year-old-man.

EB: Yes, someone was killed yesterday. I know that there was a shooting last night, but we found out this morning that that person died as well, so two people died yesterday.

GF: So tell me about what you've organized here? What are these ceasefire weekends, as they're called?

EB: So it's called ceasefire just so that people get the message that we don't want anybody to kill anybody else. But it's really not just about gun violence it's about all violence. And it is two parts, so it's you know not being violent, and also celebrating life. And so this is why you will find over 35 events happening all over the city; all free events that affirm life and give people resources that they need, build community, that sort of thing.

GF: What kind of events?

EB All kinds of events, so there have been overnight resource fairs that have happened, where over 200 people got their records expunged. You know everything from people celebrating survivors and people who have been killed in domestic violence by making art and quilts. Family events with huge moon bounces and barbecues and you know so the Great Blacks in Wax Museum, in the last ceasefire, had people come and create ceasefire time capsules. So people get very creative about what it is they want to do to celebrate life.

GF: And who are you targeting with these?

EB: Everybody in the city. Everybody in the city, it's a fallacy to just try to target one demographic. America is a very violent place with a violent culture. And so you know we're targeting everybody in the city — that everybody in the city, for at least these three days, should be checking their responses to conflict, making sure they're not being violent to one another, and purposely being peaceful to everybody that they meet.

GF: The population of Baltimore I understand is just over 600,000 people. Last year, the city set a new record for homicides: 343 deaths. Why is the homicide rate so high?

EB: So we're going to talk about Baltimore as if it’s some anomaly in America. You have to understand that homicide is a public health issue. And so in a system that is built within oppression, in order for the system to survive, some people have to be at the bottom of it. It creates people living in criminal conditions, which means then it creates criminality. And so places where you see a lot of oppression, you're going to see violence. So you have to get to the root causes of the violence in order to address it properly. And so any question about why there is a high level of violence in Baltimore, you're going to have to go back into what has happened to Baltimore; what has happened to the people in Baltimore. And when you study that history, you're going to find over and over again people being traumatized, people not having opportunities to have access to basic needs in life like healthy food and good education and adequate housing, and so you're going to see those levels of violence.

GF: But if those are the root causes of violence, and I think you know people understand that this is a complicated thing…

EB: I disagree; I don't think people understand that. Because if they did, it wouldn't be a question that people keep asking. So the very question why is there so much violence means that people really don't understand it.

GF: But if those are indeed the root causes, how is it that declaring a ceasefire a weekend with all these community activities addresses that?

EB: Well, because what we're doing and the outreach every three months leading up to a ceasefire is we're not just talking about that one weekend. We're talking to each other about what resources we need? What is going on in your life? What has happened to you? And then people are getting connected to the resources that then allow them to have the better life that they're looking for, whether it is jobs, whether it is record expungement, if it is I'm getting into addiction recovery programs, getting involved in movements that are trying to get rid of so much blight in our city. Whatever it is that people feel like is an injustice, this movement has allowed people to talk to one another, and find out about things that are happening in the city that they need or that they need to be involved in. And so that kind of unity and that kind of community building is addressing people's lives and giving people hope.

GF: You've had several of these so far. This ceasefire, regrettably, has now ended. When do you start again?

EB: So the next ceasefire is Mother's Day weekend — they have been quarterly. Also, I just want to say really quickly about why we got this 11 days. I don't want it to be mistaken that this one ceasefire movement got Baltimore 11 days without murder. That would be a preposterous thing to say because of the public health issue. It's been the work that people have been putting in for years in Baltimore that’s starting to pay off.

GF: Thank you very much, Erricka Bridgeford. Good luck with your work.

EB: Thank you so much.

GF: Bye bye.

EB: Bye bye.

JD: Erricka Bridgeford is a community activist in Baltimore. We reached her in nearby Annapolis, Maryland. We have more on that story on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient]

New Hampshire lottery mystery

Guest: Bill Shaheen

JD: A woman in New Hampshire has won the Powerball Lottery. It’s a 560-million-dollar —U.S. dollar that is — jackpot. One thing is preventing her from collecting her prize: She doesn’t want to reveal who she is. She is known only as "Jane Doe". She is asking a judge to let her collect her cash, and remain anonymous. The state's lottery commission says it's legally bound to release her name and hometown. Bill Shaheen is one of Jane Doe's attorneys. We reached him in Dover, New Hampshire.

GF: Mr. Shaheen, your client has just won more than half-a-million-dollars, why does she want to keep her identity secret?

BILL SHAHEEN: Well, because when you win this kind of money, and you're not used to this kind of money, if you are mature and you want to handle the money responsibly you need time. First of all, to reflect on what has just happened to you, and what you want to do with it? And there is a burden to it. It’s just not spending money because that happens kind of in a flash after the first three to six months. But then, all of a sudden, you have this obligation because you've been so lucky to share the wealth. So the first steps are you've got to try to find out how do you invest it wisely, and how you spend it generously? And that takes time to reflect. And people who win the lottery get bombarded with requests and ideas, and there is no peace of mind. Your friends look at you differently, your relatives look at you differently, and you just lose yourself, and that's something I'm trying to protect and preserve for her.

GF: So nobody at this point knows that she's been so lucky?

BS: I can't say that. I can say very few people know.

GF: What is she worried about specifically?

BS: Well, she's worried about the things you see in the news, like the woman in Massachusetts who won like 700-million, and she had policemen around her house 24/7. That's not the life she wants to live.

GF: As I understand it, she has actually signed the ticket, according to the rules of the lottery. So has she not in fact been claimed her prize already?

BS: No, because it's still in her possession. Until l I actually go and redeem it for her, it's still in her possession. If she should lose it or if it should burn up in a fire, she hasn't won anything.

GF: Now, I gather that the attorneys for the New Hampshire lottery are quite clear as to what the rules are. Presumably, they would argue that she knew what the rules are when she bought the ticket. But they say that you know this is in accordance with open records law that there are very good reasons that lottery winners are identified. Transparency is important to a lottery, and to the credibility of a lottery —the integrity. What do you say to that?

BS: Well, that might be true on paper. But in reality, New Hampshire's one of seven states that allows for anonymity, for example, the first Powerball winners I represented that won 487-million, they were wise enough not to sign the back. When I went up to redeem the ticket, I signed the back as the trustee of the trust. Nobody knows who they are. No one's ever going to know who they are.

GF: So she could have had the anonymity; she just made a mistake by signing it too early, is that it?

BS: It's exactly that. And the problem with the state's ticket and this is what we pointed out to the judge, and I believe the judge picked it up. Was if you look at the back of the ticket, the first thing they say is as soon as you know you win, sign the ticket immediately. It doesn't say if you sign the ticket, you've lost your anonymity. So that is a bit unfair, and that's the argument we're making.

GF: So what is she asking the courts to do at this point then?

BS: To allow her to redeem the ticket, to gather the funds through a trust, and to seal it and not open it to the public. Or in the alternative, like they did in the state of Ohio, once we redeem the ticket and it goes into the machine as an original, it comes out, and we whiteout her name, and we put in the name of the trust.

GF: I was going to say I understand she lives in a small town in New Hampshire — as many towns in New Hampshire are small — surely this kind of news gets around anyway, doesn't it?

BS: It may. It hasn't for my first people — the first people I did it for. It’s kind of a wonderful thing to be able to walk around and have the same friends and have the same acquaintances, and just continuously do random acts of kindness. It just gives me a great feeling doing it for them has their trustee. So there are some people who don't mind the notoriety, and when and if she's ready, she'll come out. And if she isn't, she won't.

GF: But in the meantime, she's losing money, isn't she?

BS: She's losing about $15,000 a day.

GF: $15,000 A day! Wow!

BS: And that's money that could be going to food banks, and pantries, and other kinds of charities. And that's why I think we have an agreement with the Attorney-General's office to allow us to redeem the ticket in the name of the trust, and then to seal it until the final hearing of the last court.

GF: And when would that be?

BS: This judge I think, and, of course, the state agrees with us on that I believe. They don't have any problem with her getting the ticket. The issue is that are we going to make that ticket public? Well, they can't hold that over her head to hold onto her money, so they have to give it to her. We think the judge is going to order it anyway. But I think they agree with us that they are going to allow me to redeem the ticket in the name with the trust as trustee. And then what will do the judge can take his time deliberating over a good and fair judgment. If he decides in our favour, all well and good; if he decides against us, we'll probably take an appeal to the Supreme Court. And we have 30 days after the judge's order.

GF: Have you talked to your client? Do you know what she wants to do with that money?

BS: Well, she has some ideas. You know when you’re just an average person and you win this kind of money, all kinds of ideas come in and out ahead. And you need that time where people aren’t calling you or aren’t bothering you to reflect on what am I going to do with this? I know she wants to do a lot of good stuff. I know she wants to give a part of it away to charity. And it’s what charity? That won't cover all the charities in the world. It won't cover even a drop of them, but she wants it to be meaningful.

GF: You're confident in your case. But what will she do if, in the end, the court decides to side with the lottery authorities? Will she ultimately reveal her identity if that's the only way she can get all this money she's won?

BS: Well, she won't reveal it. But I'm sure that the lottery commission will comply with the court order, and anyone who filed a Freedom of Information request will be able to see the front and back of the ticket.

GF: But, at the end of the day, she understands that her identity may well become known soon.

BS: Absolutely, I mean we're all going to comply with the law, but that's not going to stop us from fighting.

GF: All right. Thanks very much for telling us about it today, Bill.

JD: Bill Shaheen is one of the attorneys representing Jane Doe, who wants to remain anonymous after winning 560-million dollars in the Powerball lottery. We reached Mr. Shaheen in Dover, New Hampshire. We have more about that story on our website.

Bere Island lottery

JD: And that story did remind us of another story: off the southwest coast of Ireland is Bere Island — population 200 people, around there. And last fall, Mary Murphy, who runs the post office there, sold a winning lottery ticket. But no one would say who'd won, including Ms. Murphy. Carol tried… she sincerely did. Here's part of their conversation.

CO: Mary what's it been like at the post office today?

MARY MURPHY: It's been crazy paper. Well it started yesterday after word came through that I had sold the winning tickets and people are texting me and ringing me all over the world.

CO: And what are they asking you?

MM: They all want to know who won it — who did I sell it to. I don't know. I know I can’t say, I'm not allowed by the lottery. The person has to claim the money up in Dublin. They actually won five hundred thousand euros.

CO: No one has claimed it?

MM: Nobody has claimed it yet, but they won’t do it with me, they’ll have to do it in Dublin at the lotto headquarters.

CO: Now you were the one who sold it, but do you know if it's really somebody in your community who bought it?

MM: I can't say, I can't say anything. I'm not allowed.

CO: OK.

MM: I know everybody wants to know, and they all think I know but I'm not allowed to say. It's part of being with the National Lottery, I'm not allowed to say anything.

CO: Have the people from the National Lottery been visiting your shop?

MM: They came this morning. We have all the posters and the placards, we've all the bunting, we’ve got everything up.

CO: OK. And you have that up for what? What are you trying to do?

MM: They brought down champagne to celebrate the victory. So they opened champagne here and the children from the school children came over to say hello to us as well while they were here. We’ve had a great time here today.

CO: OK, they're having a celebration but no one has claimed the ticket.

MM: Nobody has claimed the ticket.

[LAUGHTER]

MM: We’re celebrating the fact that I sold the winning ticket.

CO: OK so they popped the champagne for you?

MM: I'm the first post office on an island to sell any winning tickets for the lottery.

MM: It's been won all around Ireland you know, but I'm the first actual place on an island to sell a winning ticket.

CO: OK. Now I know you can't betray anything, but is it possible that it’s somebody from off island who bought the ticket could do it?

MM: I had visitors here on Monday, I had people here Monday so there was people in — it could be.

CO: Do you know what day the ticket was sold?

MM: It was Monday, last Monday.

CO: So you know everybody who bought a ticket roughly on Monday?

MM: Look, I really, you know, it's just it's confidential, that’s all.

CO: But Mary you know people listening to this — anyone who has seen a very famous movie called Waking Ned Devine.

MM: I thought this morning, I've been telling it all day.

[LAUGHTER]

CO: And do you remember that in that movie there's a very small Irish village called Tulaigh Mhór, and the Post Mistress reveals who bought tickets.

MM: Yeah, I can't do that. You keep asking me, all of you are asking me but I can’t.

[LAUGHTER]

CO: She did, but you're not going to.

MM: Oh no, nope — can't.

CO: But people are trying to get you to do that, is that right?

MM: Oh they are, and they’re speculating about who was here or who wasn't. And they told me they could check my CTV, and I said, “Nobody is doing anything,” I said. It would be lovely if someone from Bere Island won it, and whoever has won it, I wish them the best of luck.

CO: If it is somebody in Bere Island who won, how far will 500,000 Euros go in your community?

MM: Well I was going to be watching out to see if anybody's getting anything new. We’ll just have to wait and see.

CO: So people are going to be watching to see if anybody is suddenly driving a flashy in the car?

[LAUGHTER]

MM: Yes, yes. So far nobody has claimed it, so you know, we just have to wait and see.

CO: But is it possible for someone to claim it and not go public?

MM: Yes they could do that.

CO: So sometimes they protect the identity of people.

MM: Yes they will protect the identity unless the people want it publicized. At the moment we're not supposed to, it’s private.

CO: If people in Bere Island will go crazy trying to find out who it is.

MM: They’re going nuts, absolutely! They’re all asking and they all think I know, but I can't say anything. I can't tell who was in here on Monday buying things. It's just private.

CO: Just tell me this, if the person who bought the ticket doesn't go public — we never know — will you know?

MM: No, no, no, no.

CO: So you won’t know anything?

MM: No, no, it’s up to the National Lottery in Dublin.

CO: Mary, is it driving you crazy that people are after you for this?

MM: Yes, but look that's the way it is. There are the rules and we must abide by them.

CO: But you're still drinking the champagne?

MM: Well I don't drink you see, I had water in my glass, but the rest of the people were all having champagne.

CO: And was it pretty exciting?

MM: It was crazy, it was absolute crazy. The man sprayed us with champagne over our heads outside the door here.

CO: So you're wearing champagne but not drinking it?

MM: Yeah, yeah. I had to put up my glass, and I had my glass up, but there was water in it.

[LAUGHTER]

CO: Well Mary.

MM: I'm going for a nice strong cup of tea now, that's what I like.

[LAUGHTER]

CO: OK. Well, we'll leave you to have your tea.

MM: Thank you for all your kindness and for all the good wishes from everybody.

CO: You too Mary. Thanks so much.

MM: Thank you so much. Bye, bye.

CO: Bye

JD: Well, from our archives, that was Carol in conversation with Mary Murphy, who runs the post office on Bere Island. That interview took place last fall.And we were’ still intrigued, so a week later, we called Ms. Murphy to try again. Ant this time she talked, but she still wasn't talking.

CO: How are things in Bere Island.

MM: Still buzzing around the place.

CO: Any news on Bere Island?

MM: Well, the winners have claimed their money, it's remaining anonymous, and I'm not passing any more comments at all about anything.

[LAUGHTER]

CO: Mary…

MM: I'm still staying quiet because that's what I've been told to do.

CO: OK.

[LAUGHTER]

MM: I know you're all having fun. Everybody thinks I know and that I must say, but look I'm not. They wish to remain anonymous.

CO: You do know, don't you Mary?

MM: I'm not saying anything. There was visitors too that day. They were here too.

CO: The island is crawling with media and they know that people are local. The people who won this lottery are living, are residents — longtime residents — of Bere Island.

MM: So we’ll we go with that. But I can't say, I'm not saying that. You're hearing it from other people not me.

CO: Mary, there's only…

MM: I can’t confirm anything because that’s my job.

CO: There’s only 200 people on Bere Island, how can you keep this a secret?

MM: Well, that's part of what I have to do. And actually people know, and trust me, if I'm told not to say anything, I won’t.

CO: But you do know, don't you?

MM: No I didn't say that. You know you're putting words in my — no, no.

CO: But OK. But everybody else knows right?

MM: I'm not saying anything. Now please let them enjoy it. I've had the most wonderful time here today because out of all that, all the media ringing me, last Saturday I got a phone call from the Sun newspaper and I am a Liverpool fan, and we don't talk to the Sun after the Hillsborough disaster — they wrote lies — when the lady rang me from the Sun I told her I was a Liverpool fan and I couldn't talk to her. So you won't believe it, tonight I was due to go to Castle Lambert to the Beara Coast Hotel to meet Ronnie Whelan and Ray Houghton, two legendary Irish and Liverpool players — my heroes.

CO: You met them?

MM: And guess what? They came in to see me instead.

CO: They came to the post office?

MM: They walk in the door here about quarter four, four o'clock — I got the shock of my life. Can you believe it? They came in to see me here.

CO: Pinch me.

MM: It's unbelievable.

CO: It's just extraordinary.

MM: It's extraordinary. And I was joking to people they said, “you did not say to the sun’ I said, ‘I did.’ I said, ‘I want to go see Liverpool playing,’ I said, ‘I'd never again get into a match.’ They came in to see me. I've had the most amazing week here. I’ll never have anything like it ever again in my life.

CO:But Mary did they come in to see you because you had sold the winning ticket?

MM: Yeah, and also because they heard I was a Liverpool fan and that I wouldn't speak to Sun, you see — it was a combination of the things. I bought a ticket for each of them, a lotto ticket, and they said, ‘Rub it now, put yor magic rub on it.’

CO: So you know you bought them a ticket?

MM: Yes, I did. But I bought it with my own money just to treat them.

CO: And what did they — those two football players.

MM: They were thrilled, they just told me to rub my magic on it.

[LAUGHTER]

CO: OK, Now let’s go back to the winners. I know you’re trying to distract me Mary. I know you’re trying do this.

MM: I'm not.

[LAUGHTER]

CO: You are deliberately.

MM: No.

CO: You went someplace else to keep me from asking you more about these people.

MM: I know you're going to keep on it, but I'm going to keep saying no, no, no. I keep saying, if you're not in, you can’t win, I keep saying that to them and please support your local office.

CO: But the people who won say they're going to hold a big party on Bere Island.

MM: That was actually written in a newspaper, I read in the newspaper.

CO: So can you keep this a secret if they're going to hold the party on Bere Island?

MM: Well, sure we'll see, maybe you'll hear about the party when it happens.

[LAUGHTER]

CO: Your brother, Brendan Murphy, he's the island postman isn't he?

MM: He is.

CO: What sort of questions is he getting?

MM: The same as me, but as he told them, ‘Mary wouldn't say anything to any of us’ he said. And that is the truth, I wouldn't, I wouldn't tell any of my my older sisters or anything. Everyone’s been asking me you must know, I said no.

CO: But even when everybody knows — everyone is going to know who the winners are.

MM: No I just, I said just leave me alone, I said I'm not supposed to say anything.

[LAUGHTER]

CO: You told The Independent newspaper, you said you're getting calls from everywhere in the world including from a Canadian radio station.

MM: I did I hope you didn't mind.

CO: No, no, you can tell anybody you want about us, that’s not a secret.

MM: They’re totally fascinated with me. I said I've literally gone all over the world. You know when I did I did say that you had been on to me from Canada because they couldn't believe it.

CO: Are you selling lots of lottery tickets?

MM: My sales of quadruple, absolutely quadrupled. It's unreal.

CO: Well, Mary I'm not going to push you any further.

Thank you for your kindness and we'll enjoy the occasion.

CO: It's good to talk to you.

MM: It’s a very rare occasion.

CO: All right Mary, take care.

MM: Thank you again.

CO: All right, bye, bye.

JD: From our archives, that was our second, delightful, and yet, not-especially-informative interview with Mary Murphy of Bere Island, County Cork, Ireland.

Back To Top »

Part three: Refugee child benefits, flu deaths

Morgan Tsvangirai

JD: As recently as last week, his party was insisting reports that he was critically ill were exaggerated; they, however, weren't. Today, Zimbabwe's veteran opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai died in Johannesburg, where he was being treated for colon cancer. The 65-year-old had devoted his political career to opposing Robert Mugabe's long grip on power. In 2009, he finally became prime minister and entered into an uncomfortable coalition government, which lasted four years. As Mr. Mugabe's most prominent opponent, Mr. Tsvangirai endured imprisonment, assassination attempts, and severe beatings from Zimbabwean authorities. But he didn't give up. In June of 2008, Carol spoke with Morgan Tsvangirai, after he was detained by police, and told that his party, the Movement for Democratic Change, was banned from political campaigning.

SOUNDCLIP

CO: Mr. Tsvangirai, you were detained again today by police. Now, the police say they are banning your rallies. How can you possibly continue to campaign for president in these conditions?

MORGAN TSVANGIRAI: Well, it is difficult but not impossible. The idea is not to convince people. The idea is to mobilize the vote and to protect the vote. The people are already convinced. All that it needs is for me to reach out and visit the people.

CO: But how can you do that? How can you reach out and visit them if they're not going to allow you to campaign?

MT: Well, they might as well ban the runoff. As long as I'm one of the contenders, I have a right to campaign, and I will continue to campaign. They will continue to arrest me, but that’s not going to stop me.

CO: You had said that you would not participate in a runoff in an atmosphere of violence. And that is clearly the atmosphere that you are in now. Why have you agreed to continue in this runoff, given the level of intimidation and violence that you are facing?

MT: The option would not have gone very well with the people. That people who have been beaten, the people who have suffered, who have been traumatized are determined to continue all the way. And its because of that and the fulfilment of their wishes that we have to continue.

CO: Your co-members of the Movement for Democratic Change are being killed. Almost every day, you're burying more of the men and women that you have worked with. At what point would you say enough is enough — that this is this is too much — the price is too high?

MT: There's no price which is too high to achieve the goal that everyone has sacrificed for. And that is democratic change in the country. We can't stop now; we'll have to go all the way.

JD: From 2008, that was the voice of Morgan Tsvangirai, Zimbabwe's main opposition leader. Mr. Tsvangirai died today. He was 65-years-old.

[Music: Piano]

Refugee child benefits

Guest: Avvy Go

JD: It's called the Canada Child Benefit, or CCB. And advocates say it's an important poverty-reduction program. But there's a catch: not everyone qualifies, including some refugee claimants. Now, six families have come forward to say that's not fair, and to challenge the Canadian Revenue Agency to change their eligibility. Avvy Go is the Metro Toronto Director of the Chinese and Southest Asian Legal Clinic. She's representing the families. We reached Ms. Go in Toronto.

GF: Ms. Go, can you start by telling us a bit about these families you represent? Who are they?

AVVY GO: Sure. We have about six clients right now. They are all women — women of colour — who came to Canada at different stages of their lives. Some of them came here to apply for refugee because they're fleeing persecution from the country of origin. Others may have lived here longer, and they may have come through other status. But right now, are living in Canada without full-status, whether it's citizen or permanent resident. But all of them have lived in Canada for a number of years. They have children, including children who are born in Canada. They are all low-income, and they have all applied for the Canada Child Benefit and were denied benefits.

GF: On what grounds? Why did they not qualify?

AG: Well, they would otherwise have qualified, except for the fact that these women do not have permanent residence or citizenship status in Canada. So in other words, the only reason why they're deemed not to be qualified is because of their immigration status.

GF: And is that consistent with the legislation as you understand it?

AG: Yes, unfortunately, it is. The Income Tax Act has a provision that says that certain people can apply for Canada Child Benefits and that it’s extended to citizens, permanent residents, conventional refugees people in a certain specific humanitarian clause, as well as people who have temporary residence status, and that may include people who come here as visitors or tourists, but they have lived here in Canada for at least 18 months.

GF: So some people who are here temporarily do qualify for this benefit?

AG: Correct.

GF: But not these women that you represent?

AG: Correct.

GF: And what is the difference?

AG: The only difference is they don't have the right status, according to CRA.

GF: So help me here then, what is the argument you're making? Why should people who are only in the country temporarily, who may not qualify for refugee status, or ultimately may be denied for that status? Why should they be entitled to this benefit, do you think?

AG: Well, so, first of all, we do give these kind of benefits to people with temporary status. The only question is we only give the benefits out to some people with temporary residence status, but not all. And so my question is why not? So for instance, you know among the cases we have, some of the people have lived in Canada for more than ten years. They have children who are born in Canada. And they have worked here; they’ve filed their income tax, they have contributed to Canada. But they still are poor enough to qualify for the benefits. So we are saying to them, and we're saying to the Canadians — particularly the Canadian-born children — that unlike other children who are born in Canada or are living in Canada, they do not deserve to receive these benefits. And my question is why not?

GF: And you have an answer to that?

AG: So I mean it's a question I have for the government. And I think the fact that they are being denied is a violation of their rights. And particularly if you look at the group of people who are being denied benefits, they are all women. Because ultimately the reality is that it's women who are still the primary caregivers of children you know in the vast majority of the cases. And they are almost all racialized because the denial is based on immigration status. And that is a very highly-racialized cohort. And more importantly, it’s a very arbitrary decision. So I'll give you an example. So I've heard from a colleague of mine who was helping this woman who has been separated from her husband. Her husband has status in Canada; she doesn't. And when they became separated, she got custody of the child. And so she actually thought of giving up custody of the child in order for the child to get benefits. I mean how crazy is that? If the custodial parent happens to be one without status, then the child doesn't get the benefits. I mean it's totally illogical.

GF: And we're talking here, depending on the particular circumstances of the family, you know several thousand dollars a year per child. So what would that money mean to the families you're representing?

AG: So because the families that we represent all low-income, so a few thousand dollars could mean a lot. It could mean whether the child will get a decent meal at the end of the day. And in some cases, the child may be able get you know access to other you know extracurricular programs. They have more healthy food. But ultimately we're talking about low-income people because if you're high-income, chances are you won't get the benefits, right?

GF: And do you know how many people fall into this category? I mean ultimate what it would cost the government to simply extend that benefit to them as well?

AG: Yeah, so we don't know how many people are being excluded. And, in fact, we have filed and Access to Information request to the government maybe just under a year ago, and we still haven't received any reply. But regardless of how much that cost would be, we’re talking about the interests of children. So like you know interestingly in the family law concept, the court in Canada will look at the best interests of a child, regardless of the children’s immigration status, or the parents’ immigration status. As long as the children live in Canada, the court under the Family Law will have an obligation to consider the best interests. And why is that concept not applicable in the case of child tax benefits, which is designed to benefit the children?

GF: So you filed your challenge to this. What do you think the chances are the government will respond favourably — that the ruling will go your way?

AG: I mean I would hope that the government would not even wait for us to challenge this and start changing the law. But if we have to go to the courts, so the next level is the tax court. We certainly hope that the tax court will take into account the constitutional rights of the parents and the children and even the international rights of the children under the Convention on the Rights of Children that Canada is a signatory of. I mean I don't know at the end of the day, of course, it's up to the court to decide. And I certainly hope that they will make the right decision.

GF: Avvy Go, thanks so much for talking to us today.

AG: Thank you.

JD: Avvy Go is the Metro Toronto Director of the Chinese and Southest Asian Legal Clinic. She is representing six families who have come forward to challenge the Canada Revenue Agency over CCB eligibility. We reached Ms. Go in Toronto.

[Music: Jazz]

Taxpayer Awards

JD: They're big, they're expensive, and they make a statement. If the statement you're trying to make is "I'm really into wasting money." And if that's what the federal government was going for, it must be happy with this year's Teddy Waste Award. The Teddies are handed out by the The Canadian Taxpayers Federation, and highlight the biggest waste of taxpayers' money by a federal agency. So, today, the Teddies were, indeed, handed out. The 8-point-2 million-dollar ice rink on Parliament Hill received a nod, as did the City of Montreal for spending 34 million dollars on the Formula-E race. And then back in December of last year, we told you about LightSpell. LightSpell is an interactive art installation that the Toronto Transit Commission paid nearly two million bucks for, and then wouldn’t turn on, over fears of hate speech. And today, that decision got the TTC won it the not-so-coveted Teddy Award. From our archives, here is German artist Tim Edler describing his artwork to guest host Helen Mann.

SOUNDCLIP

HM: Mr. Edler, what was your first reaction when you heard this news that your art installation would not be turned on?

TIM EDLER: It was actually a quite large surprise for us because we have been working on this piece for a few years — since 2009 — and we've been through many rounds of discussion regarding the issue of profanity et cetera as a possible entry for the piece.

HM: Maybe you could help us by explaining the work itself; describe it, and how it will work?

TE: We are talking about a subway station, and above the platform, there's a large string of so-called 16 segment displays. That's an old-fashioned way of displaying characters. And the way the text is created is by a number of terminals on platform, which allow people to enter short phrases, but only very limited — only like up to 8 characters at a time.

HM: And how long would that text string be up on the screen or on the display?

TE: It's up there until someone else walks to a terminal and types at least the erase button.

HM: So you said you've been talking about this for quite some time, and there were perhaps some concerns early on that LightSpell might be able to be misused. What was the nature of the conversations you had?

TE: I think it was very reasonable. I mean the TTC their focus is on transporting people, it’s not a communication company. We had been aware that we were entering a new realm of discussion by saying there's now a technical means of communication or expression even of people. And so we understood that the TTC wanted to make sure that that they are not providing a chance for people feeling annoyed or even insulted by text that could feel like profanity, but even worse hate speech. The bottom line was to first have a look actually what happens. So we thought based on that very closed-circuit experiment that there would be a chance that maybe there wouldn't be so many bad results in the end.

HM: We have gotten a statement from TTC media relations saying you know they have concerns about potential misuse. And one of the notes — one of the lines in it — says senior management didn't become aware of the potential for misuse until very recently, hence the TTC’s recent attempts to find a solution. What do you make of that? That senior management seems to be suggesting that they had no idea about the way the installation might work?

TE: That goes beyond my real knowledge about the way the TTC has been organized around the thing. I mean you have to bear in mind that it has of course been a process over many, many years, over many instances, and many different people are involved. But like, of course, these things have been discussed thoroughly before, and so that was a surprise that suddenly it appeared that you know there has been no information before. Of course, there has been information.

HM: What was the point of the installation? What have you been trying to say with this design?

TE: In the in the beginning, we had in mind that there should be a relation between the individual ability to express oneself, which is much enlarged by technical means nowadays, and an effect on the entire community. That was one side, and the other side obviously was the interest of public space and people behaving in public space, and how these mechanisms between the individual expression and so collective let’s say control issue how that interrelates with new technologies like digital input.

HM: One of the solutions that I gave the TDC has suggested may be approving a list of messages. You said that part of your goal here is free expression. So what do you think of that idea?

TE: So what the TTC provided as a proposal was to use a whitelist, which is we define a number of terms which then could be entered by people waiting on the platform. But I think that, as anyone can understand, it’s almost the opposite. It's almost like an ironic distortion of the initial idea. I mean if we provide the text that people then are allowed to enter, that sounds more like North Korea than like Canada.

JD: From our archives, that was artist Tim Edler — creator of LightSpell, which won a Teddy today — speaking with guest host Helen Mann last year.

[Music: Guitar]

Jacob Zuma

JD: Today, South Africa's President Jacob Zuma faced an ultimatum: resign, or face a vote of no confidence in parliament tomorrow. The ruling African National Congress called for the 75-year-old to step down, amid ongoing scandals and allegations of corruption. And despite initially vowing to press on, this afternoon, Mr. Zuma went on national television and announced he would bow to the pressure to step down. Here is part of what Jacob Zuma said.

SOUNDCLIP

JACOB ZUMA: Make no mistake; no leader should stay beyond the time determined by the people they serve. I also thank the citizens of South Africa for the privilege of serving as the president of the Republic since 2009. It has been an honour that I’ll cherish as long as I live. I've also been disturbed by the instances of violence that have occurred because of the different views among members of our organization. No life should be lost in my name. I have therefore come to the decision to resign as president of the republic with immediate effect. Even though I disagree with the decision of the leadership of my organization, I have always been a disciplined member of the ANC. Countrymen, ladies and gentlemen, I thank you very much for your attention.

JD: That was South African President Jacob Zuma, announcing his resignation today.

[Music: World music]

Flu deaths

Guest: Jason Tetro

JD: It's the middle of February, it is the middle of winter, it is the middle of cold and flu season in Canada. This year's flu has hit one demographic harder than usual: children. Eight children have died of the flu thus far this season in Canada. In the U.S., 53 kids have died. Jason Tetro is a microbiologist, and the author of "The Germ Files." He's also a visiting scientist at the University of Guelph. Some people call him "The Germ Guy." We reached Jason Tetro in Edmonton.

GF: Mr. Tetro, how do you compare this year's flu season to last year or years previous?

JASON TETRO: Well, in the last say decade, it's definitely a worse season. And there's a number of reasons for that. But when you take it into perspective, and you start looking back further, it's actually not as bad as we might think. The last time we had an H3N2 flu season like the one we're having, it was before the vaccine was widespread. And, at that time, the average number of deaths, especially in children was about 500 per year. And so we were seeing significantly less numbers. But that doesn't take away from the fact that it is rather frightful because we're so used now to having no deaths or very few deaths every season.

GF: Are we seeing more children dying this year though compared to other years when the vaccine was available?

JT: Yes, since the vaccine has been widely-available, we haven't seen the sort of tolls that we're seeing right now. And even though they're only about one-third of what we had before the vaccine seasons, it's still rather disconcerting to see this many children come down this fast.

GF: So why is that? What's happening?

JT: We're seeing a number of different types of what we call H3N2 flu. Normally, we only see one every year. But this year, it's a little different. We're seeing several different versions. As well as the B strain of the influenza virus, which unfortunately, has significantly greater impact on children. So in both those cases, if you don't have the immune response already prepped, whether it be through vaccination or prior experience with other types of flus, unfortunately, the consequences are not going to be very pleasant.

GF: Generally speaking, do children get vaccinated less frequently than adults? I mean usually, we tend to focus on elderly people.

JT: Well, having the vaccination in elderly is extremely good. But we have been looking at trying to increase the number of vaccinations in children, particularly those who are so young that if they do contract influenza, they are at a much higher risk. And another thing — and I'm not sure if you know this — but especially in elderly people, we tend to focus on those who have what we call immunocompromised conditions. Things like you know diabetes, neurological disorders, cystic fibrosis, asthma. Well, we also want to focus on children with those. And one of the things that is particularly depressing is that in a number of the cases of children who have died from the flu this year, they had these complications.

GF: And yet, people are saying at least that this year's vaccine has not been particularly effective, certainly compared to years past. Why is that?

JT: When you're dealing with a vaccine, you have one shot against one particular type of virus. And, unfortunately, the H3N2 that is circulating isn't just one — there's actually several of them. They're called subgroups or clades is the official term for it. And, unfortunately, over the last few years, we've seen that number of clades go from one, which we could have a vaccine for, now to five. And so really the vaccine is only showing itself I think it's approximately about 17 per cent effective, which is quite poor. But what people don't realize is that even though you're not being a perfect match, what it's doing is it's helping to train the body. And this is one of the reasons why I and myself and other public health officials are saying that it's never too late to get that vaccine.

GF: So even though it's only 17 per cent effective against this particular strain, it's still worth doing?

JT: Yes, because, at the end of the day, if you have even partial immunity, it's going to help you. And if you look at studies where they've actually looked at children who caught the flu, whether they were vaccinated or not, even in an off year, you actually saw the rates of complications, hospitalizations, and deaths go down.

GF: Is there a way to make a more effective vaccine? Or is it simply going to be a lottery or a guessing game every year?

JT: When you start talking about having one shot against five, that word lottery comes into effect. Thankfully over the last ten years, there have been attempts to go at what we call a universal flu vaccine, which means that it will cover all the different types — all the different strains — of influenza without having to worry about evolution or mutation or whatever. Now, the universal vaccine has been seeing a little bit more progress, but we're still not yet at the point where we're ready to test this in a wider scale. So at the moment, while we're still having to deal with you know the lottery concept when it comes to H3N2, the best thing for people to do is to have the vaccine, but then pay much stricter attention to just that good, old-fashioned hygiene.

GF: Yes. Well, you are The Germ Guy, so yes so how does The Germ Guy avoid germs this time of year?

JT: Well, I carry my alcohol-based hand sanitizer with me everywhere I go. And for anyone who wonders it's 62 to 70 per cent alcohol. And I put on my hands for about 15 seconds, and that's going to keep me safe. But one of the things that I do is I do a fashionable mask. There was a study done in 2010 that actually showed that something that most people wear on a regular basis during the winter season is about 60 per cent as effective as those masks. And that's a scarf. So it doesn't matter where I go, I have got my neck-tube, or gaiter, or my scarf, or whatever. And anyone who happens to be sputtering around me, instead of running away like Tom Cruise in that War of the Worlds movie, I just put that over my nose, and I'm going to be fine.

GF: All right, I'm wrapping mine around my mouth as we speak. Thanks so much, Jason. Thanks for your time.

JT: It was a pleasure. Have a great day.

GF: Bye bye.

JD: Jason Tetro is the author of “The Germ Files”, and a visiting scientist at the University of Guelph. The Germ Guy and his scarf were in Edmonton.

[Music: Ambient]

Kansas dog candidate

JD: Can you pay the fees? Are you willing to fill out forms? Do you like saying, "Let me be clear", “Make no mistake”, and "The people of (whatever your community is) deserve better"? Let me be clear: that last one isn't a legal prerequisite to run for governor of Kansas. There aren't any. That's why the race to replace Sam Brownback is so confusing. In late January, Mr. Brownback — who'd been governor for seven years — was confirmed as the U.S. ambassador at large for religious freedom. There will be an election in November. Whoever replaces him will have to cope with the disastrous effects of his tax cuts. And, now, whoever replaces him will also have to be human. That's bad news for Angus. He's only three, but that wasn't the problem: Kansas has no age requirement for gubernatorial candidates. That's why six teenagers are running. Angus is also a state resident, which also is not legally necessary. Angus’s problem is that he is a dog. That's not explicitly prohibited. Nothing is. As Bryan Caskey, the state's director of elections said last year, quote, "Under Kansas law, there is no law governing the qualifications for governor, not one. So there's seriously nothing on the books that lays out anything, no age, no residency, no experience. Nothing." Unquote. And still, on Tuesday, Mr. Caskey sternly told Angus to lie down and stay. He said, quote, "Officially, we will not allow a dog to run for governor.” Well, that's bad news to Angus's owner, irrelevant news to Angus, and good news for Kansas — in the sense that it now has a single rule about who can run for governor. That won't change the fact that the whole campaign will be a dog and pony show. Although, it will ensure there are no actual dogs or ponies.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

February 14, 2018 episode transcript

More Stories Like This