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 2019

The AIH Transcript for May 6, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello I'm Carol Off.

JEFF DOUGLAS: Good evening. I'm Jeff Douglas. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight...

CO: Dwindling returns. A landmark United Nations report warns that species after species is being pushed into extinction -- one of the authors describes the tough choices we must make to avert disaster.

JD: Boom and bust. An American pharmaceutical CEO faces the possibility of prison after a jury finds him guilty of bribing doctors to boost his company's opioid prescription.

CO: What a tangled web they weave. A former U.S. Homeland Security secretary warns Justin Trudeau that there will be consequences if the Chinese company Huawei is allowed to build the next generation of Canada's Internet.

JD: Why get locked down when you can lock on to new friends? Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen prepares for his first night in a prison that's home to both the Fyre Festival fraudster and "The Situation" from reality TV fame.

CO: Cover story. In Parliament he fought for Quebec to have a separate future -- now former Bloc Quebecois MP Jean Dorion is fighting Quebec's proposed ban on religious symbols which he says is an attack on Muslim women.

JD: And the trickle-down economics. A University of Toronto geologist snags a million dollar prize after her investigation of a deep dark mine uncovers the world's oldest and possibly stinkiest water. As It Happens. The Monday Edition. Radio with an unstenchable thirst for knowledge.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: Huawei deal could give China 'enormous leverage,' warns former U.S. Homeland Security secretary

Biodiversity report

Guest: Kai Chan

JD: A new report from the United Nations paints a grim picture of our planet. The natural world is dying at a rapid rate. Humans are to blame and we need to work harder to avoid the most dire consequences. After years of work for more than 400 authors scientists are in France to finalize the details. Kai Chan is a professor at the Institute for Resources Environment and Sustainability at the University of British Columbia. We reached him in Paris.

CO: Professor Chan this massive report seems to have one clear overarching message which is that nature is in big trouble. What is the story that you read?

KAI CHAN: Yeah that is where the story begins from my perspective. It goes on from there. And the next step is that humanity is fundamentally intertwined with nature. And so the life support systems we enjoy -- services that we enjoy from nature -- including cleaning our water, maintaining our soils, preventing floods, those services are in danger. And the rest of this story is about "what then" -- right. It's not enough just to end the story there. And there are lots of ways forward -- lots of opportunities -- but no time to waste.

CO: I was just thinking as I was reading through the summary of the stories we have done recently. We talked to a lot of scientists in the field and have heard in recent years -- they say rainforests that are going silent. They'll describe bugs that are not biting frogs -- not singing -- coral reefs almost dead. These are snapshots we have. But what is the big picture that this report tells?

KC: There are all kinds of different examples and when you put them together there are some pretty staggering numbers: up to a million species threatened with extinction. The vast majority of categories of things that nature does for people are being degraded in a substantial way that's having a negative impact on human well-being -- particularly but absolutely not all right for the world's most vulnerable people.

CO: Of course people will come to think of climate change as being a major problem or a source of this problem for nature but that's just part of it, isn't it. I mean what are the other things that are threatening biodiversity?

KC: First most important thing that undermines nature and what nature does for us is land use change and sea use change. So basically the conversion of forests to agriculture, the conversion of sea scapes into industrial zones. You know where mangrove forests for example in the coasts get cold out in order to put in say shrimp farms -- those kinds of processes are the ones that are most damaging from an environmental perspective.

CO: You are one of the authors of this study -- but at the same time you are a Canadian. And so what's Canada's record on biodiversity? Are we looking good at all in Paris as you compare notes with others?

KC: In general terms nobody's unfriendly to me here on the account of my Canadian additive. In terms of biodiversity, we're doing okay. You know we are lucky to have such a massive expanse of space where nature can hide away from human contact. Unfortunately you know our good record really is more due to that luck and not so much because we have a strong fabric of environmental laws and policies. The floral species at risk act doesn't cover most of the land. It only covers federal lands really -- and 90 percent of the land bases is either Crown land so provincial land or private land. I have to fit this in -- I'm really disappointed about what's happening in British Columbia right now. We had been working with the -- so colleagues of mine -- with Horgan government on their proposed endangered species legislation, and that government was ready to roll out what seemed to be a really great piece of legislation -- and now they have decided to put it on hold. And I'm afraid it's due to industry pressure that ultimately is really short sighted.

CO: And on that it seems that the whole debate in Canada about environment, environmental protection, has all come down to a discussion of pipelines. So how should this report inform the debate that's going on in this country right now?

KC: It's a really big debate. And you know it's almost not a debate. It's just a fight -- and it's almost a brawl you know. It makes me kind of torn up inside to think about how we've got provinces you know pulling out the stops. I mean you know taxing B.C. wines I mean that was a low blow, you know. And threatening to turn off the pipes -- the oil that flows from Alberta to B.C. also a low blow. But you know I mean the problem here is neither the jobs side of this fight nor the environment side of this fight. Neither side is wrong in this. Fundamentally the problem is that we are faced with such a stark choice. I call it a tragic trade-off. It shouldn't be okay to undermined the environment like that either for nature or for people, right. And if we had that kind of a minimum standard everywhere then we wouldn't have that stark trade off -- it wouldn't be jobs versus the environment, we could have them both.

CO: You said at the beginning that you said that there was still time to reverse some of these trends and that seems to be the consensus among the authors. Just give us a few ideas as to what might be done.

KC: Yeah so there are a lot of things that could be done. I mean first and foremost thing is for the governments to keep doing what they have started doing. For the federal government, they have been dogmatically pursuing carbon pricing in order to combat climate change. And that's a really important step. It should do that and they should do it even more strongly. And Alberta ought to play alongside with that, right. Like you know it's okay if they want to develop those, as long as it's not being done at the extent of the global environment or the national environment. It's just not fair for us in Canada -- one of the best developed, most prosperous countries on the planet, to say that our economy is worth more than the impacts of climate change that are felt by you know people [inaudible] climate refugees, people in Kenya, and elsewhere around the world who are affected by climate change causing floods, droughts, heat waves, and et cetera -- right. All for the sake of us having a stronger economy. That's just not fair.

CO: We will leave it there. Professor Chan I appreciate speaking to you. Thank you.

KC: Okay. Thank you very much.

JD: Kai Chan is one of the authors of a new United Nations report about the dire state of global biodiversity. We reached Professor Chan in Paris.

[Music]

Huawei Chertoff

Guest: Michael Chertoff

JD: Michael Chertoff has a warning for Canada. Mr. Chertoff was the United States' Homeland Security secretary under George W. Bush. And his concern has to do with Huawei. One of the Chinese giant top executives is due to appear in a Vancouver court where a judge will consider an extradition request from the United States of course. Meanwhile the Trudeau government is deciding whether Huawei can be trusted to build the next generation of Internet infrastructure across this country. Mr. Chertoff says that that decision could have major consequences for Canada's relationships with both China and the U.S. We reached Michael Chertoff in New York City.

CO: Mr. Chertoff how is the United States likely to respond if Justin Trudeau agrees to allow Huawei 5G network to be a principal part of our system?

MICHAEL CHERTOFF: Well I think it's going to raise concerns about the security of your system. And we've seen stories recently in fact involving more back doors or problems with Chinese software and hardware. So that's going to create some obstacles to the ability to rapidly share data because of the concern that they'll be compromised.

CO: You know that China says that Huawei is a private company, the Chinese government is not involved with it, and there are firewalls that would protect these networks from any kind of Chinese influence. What does the United States think of that?

MC: I think most Americans are skeptical of that. The Chinese clearly anoint certain companies as champions and support them. And if you just look at what happened recently with respect to Canadians being arrested in China as retaliation for the arrest of a senior Huawei official it suggests a degree of solicitude for the company by the Chinese government that is not consistent with the idea that they're independent.

CO: So you're saying if we are going to be punished to that degree for holding a person whose on an extradition request at the behest of the United States that that's just small potatoes compared to how China might react if we keep 5G out?

MC: What I'm saying is that to give the Chinese the ability to occupy a pivotal part of your infrastructure one that will be -- as I say -- the commanding heights of the next 10 or 20 years of the economy -- you're giving them enormous leverage in any dispute, you're giving them a surface area for which they can potentially take intellectual property or otherwise compromise confidential material. And you have to -- I think -- seriously view China as a rival if not an adversary.

CO: Well what could they potentially do?

MC: Well they could either find or embed pathways in to compromise networks and allow the theft of intellectual property. They could introduce disruption or latency into the network because it's not just the hardware and software that you first install it's all of the updates -- the patches -- everything you do to tend to and monitor the system going forward. So the person who dominates that in a way has the ability to affect everything from your power grid, to your air traffic control system, to even your sensitive national security infrastructure.

CO: As you mentioned we have two Canadians who are detained in China -- held in isolation. Two others on death row. Trade is being deeply affected as the Chinese shut us out of the markets all of this because of this extradition request from your country for the Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou. Meanwhile your president is busy securing a comprehensive free trade agreement with China and benefiting. So do you understand why Canadians might feel like we're being played here?

MC: Well I don't think that's a fair inference. Look I think there are a couple different things. First of all, I mean obviously the security relationship the U.S. and Canada have is a very strong one. We're allies. And I don't think anybody believes the U.S. is an ally of China. Nor is it completely clear to me what's going to come out of this trade agreement. I think what actually is demonstrated by Chinese behavior is that when you're touching on what they view as one of their national champions they will use any leverage they have to punish you. And that ought to cause people to ask the question well jeez if we give them the keys to the kingdom on our 5G network what will they do if they don't like something we do in the future? I mean to me what they are doing -- which is outrageous -- to Canadians in China underscores the risk of giving them a commanding position in a critical part of your economy.

CO: But wait a second we arrested Meng Wanzhou at your behest -- at your government's behest, and we're being punished while you move ahead with trade deals that we're shut out of now. So I guess at some point this seems rather unfair to us.

MC: First all I don't know whether the Chinese aren't going to try to punish the U.S. But if you're asking me why the Chinese decided they were going to focus on Canada in retaliating I think it suggests they're trying to bully Canada. And it may be that they feel they can get away with it more with Canada or that they can intervene before the extradition gets done. But I would think that the answer to that is in the head of the Chinese -- why they have chosen to focus their ire on Canada rather than the U.S.? Not that that couldn't change.

CO: Well maybe the United States should start pushing back at our behest a bit.

MC: Well I mean I think we may see some further developments along with some. I would not describe the relationship between China and the U.S. as a warm and fuzzy relationship. So nobody should have that misapprehension. But I would be very careful not to have the Chinese try to drive a wedge between the Canadians and the Americans by making it seem as if they're picking on one and not on the other because over the years the Chinese have been quite aggressive against the United States. So it's not like they're benign to the U.S. -- they just choose different weapons under different circumstances.

CO: Well President Trump has said that he may trade Meng Wanzhou for getting his trade deal so maybe we're being played by your country as well.

MC: I don't know what you're referring to and I don't read Twitter as a road map for what's going to happen. I would not presume anybody knows where it's going to be in the next step in all of this because there are a lot of balls in the air.

CO: Is it not true that President Trump suggested that he could exchange Meng Wanzhou for a trade deal with China?

MC: He often says all kinds of different things which never come to pass. So I'm not going to speculate as to what was in his head but I'm not going to presume that this has any realistic prospect of happening.

CO: All right we'll leave it there. Mr. Chertoff thank you.

MC: All right. Bye bye.

JD: Michael Chertoff was the U.S. Homeland Security secretary under George W. Bush. We reached him in New York.

[Music]

Oldest water award

Guest: Barbara Sherwood Lollar

JD: Barbara Sherwood Lollar does not use a divining rod. But the geologist has become a master at finding secret pockets of water. A decade ago she discovered what is now known as the oldest water in the world. Buried two-and-a-half kilometres underground at a metal mine site in Timmins, Ontario. The University of Toronto geologist followed her nose and discovered some yellow, stinky liquid, estimated to be 2 billion years old. The ancient water could hold answers to other mysteries including whether there is life on Mars. Today, Professor Sherwood Lollar receives a one million dollar prize for her work -- the prestigious Herzberg Gold Medal. We reached Barbara Sherwood Lollar in Ottawa.

CO: Ms. Sherwood Lollar first of all big congratulations to you.

BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR: Thank you so very much.

CO: So what does it mean to you to win the Herzberg gold medal?

BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR: Oh it's both humbling and inspiring and a little surreal. I mean when you look at the people have won it before and you look at the other people winning awards here tonight because this is of course is just one of many that are given out by NSERC. It really is just a really inspiring event to be part of.

CO: Now in part, the research you've done is because you have quite the nose for really old water I understand.

BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR: You know we work in water right across the board. I work both in very near surface water related to drinking water contamination. But the part that you're referring to is the part where the water gets smelly -- yes. Deep in the earth this water has interacted with the rocks so much that it's actually picked up all kinds of components that can be 3, 5, 10 times the salinity of seawater. And some of the things dissolved in that water do have quite a musky odor to them.

CO: What does it smell like? The one up in Timmins near in Kidd Mine -- what did your nose tell you? What did it smell like when you first identified this water was there?

BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR: It's a musky kind of a smell. And it certainly allows you pretty quickly identify whether some of that water is flowing. I mean remember it's dark down. When we're working we have the lights of our lamps -- and it's not as easy to necessarily find these fractures that are naturally bleeding out this water. And so literally we do follow our noses.

CO: And then once you had found what you thought to be old water in this case -- you tasted it.

BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR: Oh no -- I mean not really. It is bubbling out of the rocks so you're down on your knees, you're working in the dark, you're trying to train and teach students at the same time as you're taking these precious scientific samples. Inevitably somebody gets a little wet and so it really is more along those lines -- you know you get a little bit of it on the side face and inevitably you've tasted it not really meaning to. And believe me you wouldn't do it twice [laughter] because it's so salty it's really quite horrible. It's not an experience you want to repeat.

CO: So the smell and taste and all of this that was just the first test -- you didn't just do that say, 'oh this is 2 billion year old water.' What went into actually discovering how old this water was?

BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR: Well actually you know once it was a mission to that site to look for this kind of thing. For that particular site we were working very deep -- 2.4 kilometres below the surface. And then we do a series of analysis. In that particular case measuring something that people have heard of all the time -- helium. The kind of thing that people are most familiar with from party balloons but from the Earth's point of view helium and the other gases like neon and argon these are fingerprints of the planet because they accumulate in the deep earth over time. And so by measuring how much of them is there and then certain characteristics about what they're like this can allow us to come up with an estimate of the residence time of those fluids. And indeed when we measured these -- the first comment that was made by the post-doc who was working on it at the time was, 'these can't be right. The mass spectrometer must be broken.'

CO: And so these are substances, gases, and minerals that are released from the rocks.

BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR: That's right. And these are record breakers. There's more highly radio genic helium, neon, and argon within these waters than had ever been before seen on the planet.

CO: Does anything live in this water?

BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR: Well that's been one of the the major drivers. I mean there's been a major revolution in our understanding of life just in my own lifetime. In the late 70s when I was finishing high school -- sort of for the first time we began to understand that life was not just something that's restricted to the surface of the planet where it needs the sun's energy. That there was a different kind of life -- a different tool in life's bucket of tricks where life was instead making a living out of chemical reactions between the water and the rock. Really it changes are thinking about the distribution of life on the planet.

CO: But I understand that this also -- not just on this planet -- this leads you to some questions about the possibility of life on Mars.

BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR: Exactly. And the reason with respect to Mars is is that around the time that life developed on Earth, the climate on Mars could actually been quite nice -- much warmer and much wetter. But in billions of years since, Mars changed significantly. It lost its atmosphere. And eventually became the cold-dry desert that it is today. So there's no liquid water on a permanent basis on the surface of Mars anymore. But there might be water stored at depths.

CO: Just on a personal note -- when you were getting into sciences, when you were a kid, when you were a young girl or woman did you think this is where you'd be?

BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR: No I never imagined that. I mean I knew I was excited about science but I think I had this idea that most what's out there is known and what I would be doing is maybe you know adding a little extra brick to the wall of knowledge. And I think that's one of the most exciting parts that I can communicate to people is that there's so much we still don't even know about this planet. There are so many challenges. There are new environments that we hadn't noticed yet. And so what I like to emphasize to students is that in terms of exploration we can go and explore the solar system, but there's an awful lot to explore right here. I used to say when I was a kid and thinking it might be fun to be a scientist I never realized it was going to be this much fun.

CO: All right. Well that's very inspiring for any young men or women listening to this -- and girls and boys. Mr. Sherwood Lollar I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR: Thank you.

JD: Barbara Sherwood Lollar is an Earth sciences professor at the University of Toronto, and this year's Herzberg gold medal winner. We reached Ms. Sherwood Lollar in Ottawa.

[Music]

Jail time

JD: The Otisville New York prison has a new resident tonight. Donald Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen arrived this morning. He's beginning a three year stint for amongst other things paying two women not to tell their stories about Mr. Trump before the 2016 presidential vote. Now the service in Otisville may be a step down for Mr. Cohen. According to CNN, he is used to power breakfasting with his cigar-sucking New York buddies at a place that features 35 dollar cage-free frittatas. Cage free is going to be hard to come by. But Mr. Cohen may make some famous friends. His list of potential bunk mates in Otisville includes Reality TV's Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino. The Sitch is taking a break from the "Jersey Shore" because of some issues with unpaid taxes. Or there is Billy "the Fyre Festival guy" McFarland whose celebrity-hyped beach fest went bust under the weight of his multi-million dollar fraud. There is however no guarantee that the tabloid trio will become buddies behind bars. Vulture.com wanted an expert assessment. Former federal inmate and Wall Street Prison Consultants founder Larry Levine was realistic. He said, quote, "They're not celebrity brothers. That doesn't mean they might not play cards together. It could be cocktail hour -- they could be sipping pruno prison wine together getting bleeping drunk, laughing. It's possible." So to sum up that expert analysis: they may end up being pals or they may not -- he has a hard time saying.

[Music]

Part 2: Why Quebec nationalist Jean Dorion opposes controversial secularism bill

Fentanyl CEO guilty

Guests: Andrew Lelling

JD: Many drug dealers and users have seen jail time in the ongoing opioid crisis. Now however for the first time a pharmaceutical executive could end up behind bars for his role in the epidemic. A federal jury in Boston has found Insys Therapeutics founder John Kapoor and four former executives guilty. Prosecutors accuse them of engaging in a scheme to bribe doctors to prescribe their fentanyl based painkiller, Subsys. The company has also reported to have misled insurance companies about patients' need for the drug. Andrew Lelling is the United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts. We reached Mr. Lelling in Boston.

CO: Mr. Lelling why is this guilty verdict so important with respect to the opioid epidemic?

ANDREW LELLING: The guilty verdicts are important because it's the first time the U.S. Justice Department has held senior corporate executives responsible -- meaning executives at pharmaceutical companies for their role in the opioid epidemic. So our hope is that it will change industry behavior and that it'll be a model for other enforcement actions in the United States.

CO: And so John Kapoor who is the founder of this Insys Therapeutics was found guilty along with four other former company executives. In what way have they been found to bribe these doctors?

AL: Well there are generally two ways to bribe these doctors. The first was to simply pay them money under the guise of honoraria for speaking engagements. So they would say to these doctors we will pay you money in exchange for doing speaking engagements for other doctors which weren't really speaking engagements -- it would be say getting dinner or something. The doctor wouldn't really have to do any work. But we will only pay you these sums if your prescription rates for Subsys -- the drug at issue here -- go up. If you don't prescribe then no speaking fees. If you do prescribe then we give you speaking fees. The other way they would do this is by offering to pay the salaries of support staff in these doctors' offices -- administrative assistants and such. They would literally place people in the doctor's offices and insist would pay those people in an effort to alleviate the administrative burden on a doctor in exchange -- only in exchange -- for the doctor increasing their prescription rates for Subsys.

CO: And what is Subsys?

AL: Subsys is actually a pretty useful drug. That's the irony when it comes to the corporate side of the opioid epidemic. Subsys is essentially a liquid form of fentanyl that a patient can take by simply squeezing it under the tongue. And so it can be very effective for patients who have difficulty swallowing -- swallowing pills for example. It brings a rapid onset relief -- faster than pills do because it's already in liquid form. And it was designed as a way of alleviating pain for people who are in the final stages of cancer. The problem was that Insys was bribing doctors to prescribe the drug much more often than it should be prescribed. And as we've seen over the years, opioids -- including opioids that are initially prescribed for legitimate purposes -- can easily lead to people becoming addicted and then seeking out either pharmaceutical grade opioids on the street by illegal means or moving on to heroin and other street drugs.

CO: Back to the evidence you had in this case against Insys and John Kapoor -- there was some quite sensational evidence you presented. Can you tell us a bit about some of the more bizarre ways -- the methods they used to try to convince these doctors?

AL: Well there was sort of a freewheeling quality to the tactics they would use to cajole and bribe the doctors into doing what they wanted to do. They wanted to show the doctors a good time, right. And so in one instance they came out in trial one of the sales reps Sunrise Lee a defendant gave a doctor a lap dance during a dinner where they were trying to convince the doctor to prescribe more Subsys in exchange for additional speaking fees. Or there was an instance in which Insys sales reps created a rap video -- which you can find online and it's actually pretty good -- it's sort of touting their efforts to expand prescription rates for Subsys. And the the other metric here was not just prescribing Subsys to more people but having doctors prescribe Subsys in higher dosages. That was another way that the company would boost its profits from Subsys distribution. But I think those are the two most lurid examples of sales tactics that came out during the trial.

CO: At what point though do the doctors have to take responsibility for this?

AL: Well a lot of doctors did take responsibility for this. Doctors have been prosecuted nationwide for their role in this. For example I think the two best-known were two doctors who were in Mobile, Alabama, who had two of the highest prescription rates for opioids in the United States which is really quite a statistic -- they pled guilty, they cooperated in this case. There are other doctors who pled guilty to charges who also cooperated with the investigation. So the doctors do not walk off scot-free. There are consequences for them both on the criminal side and when it came to licensing.

CO: And you said that this is where you want to do more of this so are you expecting to see more of these kinds of bribery and racketeering cases coming forward dealing with the over-prescription of opioids?

AL: Yes I think that there are a few things to note here. One, I do think you will see more of these cases because we've proven that the model works. We approach this case with a racketeering conspiracy charge which is unusual in this context. We were able to explain it to the jury. The jury clearly got it. And we convinced the jury of the defendant's guilt. So I think you will see that model used again. On the other side of the equation I think the pharmaceutical industry is now much much more sensitive to this problem than it was when we originally charged this case. I think you've already seen a change in some industry behavior. I think they understand the potential liability, potential social costs of over-prescription. And so I think now what you see is addiction to opioids via prescription drugs is trending down. Not as far down as we would like it. But at least it's beginning to trend down which is a good sign.

CO: All right very interesting. Mr. Lelling I appreciate your time. Thank you.

AL: Sure. Thanks for having me.

JD: Andrew Lelling is the United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts. We reached him in Boston.

[Music]

Cara McNulty

JD: On Labour Day weekend of last year Joshua Steinberg hopped in a speedboat with his dad. They were going to go get some ice cream and some gas. The boat capsized, Joshua failed to resurface. A dive team recovered the 11-year-old's body 49 days later. When he drowned Joshua was not wearing a life jacket -- something that is not mandated by federal law. His mother, Cara McNulty, wants to change that. Today Ms. McNulty spoke to Robyn Bresnahan host of CBC Radio's "Ottawa Morning."

SOUNDCLIP

CARA MCNULTY: You tell yourself and come up with all kinds of excuses. What could have happened? He could be here. He could be there. Like deep down I just knew. So they were traveling home -- about a two kilometre trip. They hit two large waves and capsized. And Josh never resurfaced. So we think he was very likely unconscious when he hit the water.

ROBYN BRESNAHAN: Can you tell me more about this campaign to get children to wear lifejackets? I have to say I assumed that it was the law. But that's not the case. If you're on a boat you have to have as many life jackets as there are people -- but there's no law to say that you have to wear them.

CARA MCNULTY: Yes a lot of people think that's the law. But it is not. And fit for children's safety this is absolutely fundamental. We know the number one reason why people die in boating accidents over the age of four is not wearing a life jacket. It's been known for a long time. The Red Cross, the Lifesaving Society Canada, has been advocating for this for years. It's time...it's time now to change this.

ROBYN BRESNAHAN: You want it to be just as automatic as putting on a seatbelt.

CARA MCNULTY: Exactly. There's no argument -- it's automatic and that's how we think it should be for life jackets. He was always in a good mood. He just brought this positive energy to everybody. And he loved his family, he loved his cousins, he loved all of his friends. And this has been a huge loss -- we still deal with it every day.

JD: That was Cara McNulty in conversation with Ottawa Morning host Robyn Bresnahan. Ms. McNulty's son Joshua Steinberg died in a boating accident last year. And she wants the federal government to stipulate that all kids in boats must wear lifejackets not just have them on board.

[Music]

Bill 21: Dorion

Guest: Jean Dorion

JD: Tomorrow, politicians gather in Quebec City as hearings begin on Bill 21 begin. If passed, this controversial legislation would ban some public servants including police officers and public school teachers from wearing religious symbols. And while the Coalition Avenir Quebec government has a majority -- public opinion on the bill remains divided. With each side voicing its perspective at two separate demonstrations this past weekend in Montreal. Jean Dorion was among those protesting against the bill. Mr. Dorion is a former Bloc Quebecois MP. We reached him in Montreal.

CO: Mr. Dorio I know you were at the demonstration that was against Bill 21 on the weekend. What message did you want to send with your presence there?

JEAN DORION: I am nationalist activist -- I've been for all my life -- and I think this project is against the national interest of Quebec. This is a very sensitive issue as far as I'm concerned.

CO: Who do you think this bill is targeted at then?

JEAN DORION: Well religious minorities -- that's clear. The government has the support of mainly people to whom those different practices are unfamiliar and they're afraid of that. And this is the main support they get from. But also they get a very active support from people who are anti-religious, who are a minority but they are very active also.

CO: But this bill -- bill 21 -- is aimed at religious symbols. Not just hijabs or niqabs -- it's also Jewish kippahs, it's Christian crosses. It's all symbols of religion. So why do you say you think that it's aimed principally at Muslims?

JEAN DORION: That must give a kind of universal appearance but to me it's clear that the main target is Muslim women wearing veils. I don't see how we cannot see that.

CO: Would you call it a racist law?

JEAN DORION: No I don't use the term racist because I may look old fashioned but to me racism is the belief that some people with physical features different from the majority or different from us are inferior. I don't think this is what the bill is saying. The bill is saying that people who don't act like us in the field of religion are dangerous. And they exploit that feeling which is rather frequent.

CO: You are obviously a sovereigntist. You promote the idea of Quebec's language and culture. And other groups that are the same -- Bloc Quebecois thinks this law is reasonable and legitimate. Le Parti Quebecois says that it doesn't go far enough. Why are you not in step with other nationalists?

JEAN DORION: I could tell you that a good number of a nationalist have left those parties in recent years. The result is that those who stayed somehow accentuated the character taken by those parties especially Parti Quebecois. Parti Quebecois is really something totally different from what it was many years ago. A good many people with more liberal ideas have left the Parti Quebecois.

CO: What do you think the Parti Quebecois is intolerant? Intolerant of others? Intolerant of minorities?

JEAN DORION: There is intolerance, yes, and they exploit it.

CO: And do you think that Premier Francois Legault is playing in that intolerance?

JEAN DORION: Well honestly the Legault is much much more moderate than for example the government of Mrs. Marois at the time. So I think there is some hope when you see that the number of people who are targeted by Mr. Legault's bill is much smaller. There is a change -- there is some evolution -- this makes me hopeful. I think this project might be adopted but it will not last a very long time.

CO: You were also formerly part of the Bloc Quebecois which also says this is a reasonable and legitimate law for the Quebec nation. So you are out of step with the Bloc Quebecois as well.

JEAN DORION: This makes me very sad. I totally disagree with them on that point.

CO: You all aspire for a sovereign Quebec. What kinds of conversations do you have with them who are supporting this law?

JEAN DORION: I'm a bit desperate these times but I hope things will change. Quebecers in the past passed over some crisis of that kind. And the pro-independence movement has turned finally stronger after that. But for now it's a dark period.

CO: How did you come to be so out of step with your fellow sovereigntist?

JEAN DORION: While I tried in many ways to influence the way the movement was going but I've failed. I met privately with quite a number of PQ members (in) 2010-2011 because I saw what was coming -- and I failed. So finally I found myself -- not alone -- I found myself with many other people from the pro-independence movement who are not active. The party has changed enormously so it's disappointing.

CO: But they are passing this law because they have very broad support in the Quebec public. So what could you possibly say to Quebecers that could change their minds?

JEAN DORION: Well you know it's not only the numbers that count. You must also look at who. In the universities people are against. In the trade unions -- in the matter of schools and teaching, there is a broad hostility to that. And also what is very clear is there is a important gap between the younger population and the older population. And so those things that I have noticed are important for the future.

CO: And so you are hopeful for the future that this...

JEAN DORION: Yeah I hope an evolution.

CO: Mr. Dorion I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

JEAN DORION: It was a pleasure.

JD: Jean Dorion is a former Bloc Quebecois MP. We reached Mr. Dorion in Montreal.

[Music]

Bee problem

JD: Today in Cincinnati the weather was perfect for a baseball game. So when the Cincinnati Reds took to the field to take on the San Francisco Giants a delayed game was not in the forecast. But officials likely did not anticipate a swarm of bees showing up. Shortly before the beginning of the first inning, the bees took over home plate and for the next 18 minutes players, coaches, and officials attempted to scare them off. It was a bizarre scene that included one of the Reds utility players dressing up in a beekeepers outfit. Here are the announcers making those play-by-play calls.

SOUNDCLIP

ANNOUNCER 1: The umpires are taking the Reds off the field by the way. There's a bee issue. That's right...bees -- as those little things that fly around and can sting you. And it's created a bit of a problem and I don't know where that area is but it seems to be closer to the Giants dugout than the Reds dugout. We need to have someone discourage them from hanging around that camera because once they decide that's where they're going to be then you get the whole family that shows up.

ANNOUNCER 2: It's the bee keeper.

ANNOUNCER 1: He came out of the stands.

ANNOUNCER 2: Isn't that the guy that runs along the track between innings and races...

ANNOUNCER 1: Yeah. That and he's got the hot chocolate thing strapped to his back.

ANNOUNCER 2: [Laughs] Or it could be Derek Dietrich.

ANNOUNCER 1: Maybe a little biased but we're not that far off either. Now I may be wrong but just by the eye test it looks like they're starting to depart. What do you think?

JD: That was the call as bees took over the Cincinnati Reds field today -- delaying the game by 18 minutes. Incidentally the Reds ended up winning 12 to 4.

[Music]

Royal Baby

JD: Unless you have made a conscious effort to shut yourself off from the world today or have been assembling IKEA furniture you have probably heard the news: there is a new royal baby. Early this morning, Meghan Markle -- the Duchess of Sussex -- gave birth to a boy weighing in at seven pounds three ounces. The child is seventh in line to the British throne. Royal watchers are going to have to wait a couple more days to get their first glimpse of the baby and to hear his name. Prince Harry shared the news earlier today speaking to reporters in Windsor, England.

SOUNDCLIP

PRINCE HARRY: I'm very excited to announce that Meghan and myself had a baby boy early this morning. A very healthy boy. Mother and baby are doing incredibly well. It's been the most amazing experience I can ever possibly imagine. How any woman does what they do is beyond comprehension. But we're both absolutely thrilled and so grateful to all the love and support from everybody out there. It's been it's been amazing. So we just wanted to share this with everybody.

REPORTER: What about names? Are you still thinking about names?

PRINCE HARRY: Still thinking about names. The baby is a little bit overdue. So we've had a little bit time to think about it but yeah that's that does the next bit. But for us I think we'll be seeing you guys in probably two days time as planned as a family to be able to share it with you guys and so everyone can see the baby.

REPORTER: You can't stop smiling. It must have been -- I mean any birth is amazing but for your own child it must have been...

PRINCE HARRY: I haven't been in many births. [Chuckles] This is definitely my first birth -- but it was amazing. Absolutely incredible. As I said I'm so incredibly proud of my wife. And as every father and parent would ever say you know your baby's absolutely amazing but this little thing is absolutely to die for so I'm just over the moon. Thank you very much guys. Thank you.

JD: Prince Harry speaking to reporters earlier today about the birth of his son.

[Music]

Part 3: Cat hoarder

Cat hoarder

Guest: Belinda Vandersluis

JD: This weekend animal welfare and public health workers were called to an extraordinary scene: more than 300 cats living in a small Toronto apartment. In a Facebook post, Toronto Cat Rescue wrote that it was the second cat hoarding situation it has dealt with in just a month. The group also warned Torontonians that these conditions are harmful to the animals no matter how well intentioned the owner. Belinda Vandersluis is the executive director of Toronto Cat Rescue, whose volunteers went to the home to help retrieve the cats. We reached Ms. Vandersluis in Toronto.

CO: Belinda what was the scene when your volunteers arrived at this apartment?

BELINDA VANDERSLUIS: Well the people who attended on Saturday along with Toronto Animal Services were aghast at what they found in the apartment. We were expecting somewhere around 70 cats, and the number was very close to 300 by the time everything was finished.

CO: And how big an apartment was this?

BV: It's a two bedroom apartment in a high rise so you can imagine just how many cats -- (they) were everywhere all over the floor, all over the counters, in the bathtub. There was nowhere where there was not a cat.

CO: And was there a smell?

BV: Well of course there was. You can just imagine what it might be like in a small space with that many cats. From what I understand it was not a pleasant place to be.

CO: And what kind of health or what state where the cats in?

BV: You know the cats are in quite good shape. We have about 80 of the cats and we're getting good reports from our foster homes. We also have some cats at one of our veterinary clinic partners you know they seem in quite good shape. They're a little underweight as you can imagine. There must have been quite a competition for food amongst 300 cats but so far so good. They're doing quite well.

CO: And fleas? Parasites? Anything like that?

BV: Nothing like that. No -- they're all really in good shape. They're quite friendly with humans. We have some that are shy and nervous because they have been moved from their environment, cats don't like that so much. But some of the cats are very friendly and playing and looking for some pets and some love.

CO: And are they kittens and pregnant mums?

BV: So we have a number of pregnant queens that are ready to have their litters very very soon. We also have kittens and we have some adult cats as well.

CO: This is the old line about you can't herd cats. So how did you get all these cats out of the apartment?

BV: Well it took a lot of people. There was a whole team of people there from Toronto Animal Services with their enforcement officers. We had staff there. We had volunteers as well. And so it was just one cat at a time -- to take a cat and put it in a carrier and remove it from the apartment. I believe 187 were removed from the apartment that day. And they are at a number of organizations -- ourselves and Toronto Animal Services and Toronto Humane Society. So really the credit goes out to all the organizations and all of the staff and volunteers that helped that day.

CO: The cats were approachable, they weren't traumatized, they could be handled even if they didn't want to leave because they're familiar with it.

BV: And I think that they didn't have much space. They weren't used to really moving around. There's nowhere I think to escape in a situation like that. If you've seen the original pictures that we posted on our Facebook page there's not a lot of room in between each cat.

CO: What can you tell us about who had these cats -- whose apartment it was?

BV: Well I can't tell you too much because I don't know too much. Toronto Cat Rescue's mandate is really to be concerned about the cats and the welfare of the cats. Really the City of Toronto has more per view in the area of providing support for mental health, providing any legal support, or any enforcement support.

CO: Can you tell us to just get a sense of who or why this person have all these cats...

BV: It's a really tough question to answer. I think every situation is a little different. We had a hoarding situation only a few weeks ago where we picked up 140 cats also with our partners. And it's really difficult to understand how somebody can get into that situation. You know this week is mental health awareness week in Canada and I think you have to consider that there is a mental illness component to somebody living in an environment like that. Generally with hoarding cases that we have seen we find that the people really think that they're doing something good for the cats.

CO: But are some of these cats possibly cats that belong to other people?

BV: I'm not sure. Many of the cats look very related. It's possible that there were cats originally they had a smaller number, that were unstated neutered -- cats are very prolific breeders. It can happen very quickly. We really don't know if they were picking up cats that were strays. Many of these cats look like they have been there for some time and breeding with each other.

CO: Okay so this may be a family affair here for at least a large part of it.

BV: It's very possible.

CO: And no tips or collars or anything that...

BV: Nothing like that. No. No microchip. No collars. As I said they all look very similar -- very related.

CO: So what's going to happen to these cats now?

BV: Well these cats are going to be in our foster program for a little while. We make sure that every cat is spayed or neutered, that they're vaccinated, that they have their medical checks. When they're ready they will go up onto our website for adoption. We also work with some partner pet stores in the Greater Toronto Area and Kitchener-Waterloo. So cats will be at pet stores ready for adoption. They will be up on our website ready for adoption. And the same will happen at the other organizations who are helping out with this rescue.

CO: Okay if you're looking for cats there are a lot of cats out there.

BV: Yes. We regularly adopt out about 250 cats a month at Toronto Cat Rescue so we always have a steady stream of cats coming in and going out of the program.

CO: Belinda it's good to talk to you. Thank you.

BV: Thank you so much for your interest I appreciate it.

JD: Belinda Vandersluis is head of Toronto Cat Rescue. We reached her in Toronto.

[Music]

Gillian Colborne

JD: 47 kids. Two teachers. One classroom. And one cease and desist letter. Gillian Colborne's son was in that supersized Grade 2 class. She has since taken him out of the school because he was struggling. And now the school board has sent a cease and desist letter to Ms. Colborne and to other parents who complained. It says that they made false allegations and that staff feel quote, "unduly pressured by your relentless tactics." Ms. Colborne told CBC News the letter speaks volumes.

SOUNDCLIP

GILLIAN COLBORNE: I think it's a good example of how difficult it's been to navigate this process. It's very aggressive in tone this letter. To me it feels like all we have wanted are answers surrounding a classroom structure that we felt was unnecessary perhaps -- and instead of sitting and communicating about the concerns of parents we're given a letter that says that communication is done. It's like a big door closing. I would describe it as an overreaction -- I think is the most obvious way of stating it. It's an example of trying to squash a fly with a sledgehammer.

JD: That was Gillian Colborne of Foothills, Alberta, incidentally speaking with CBC News reporter Jennifer Lee. The school board declined an interview with CBC News. It said in a statement however it had fully addressed concerns over the class size and the action was taken to keep, quote, "third parties from negatively impacting the school and workplace."

[Music]

Shahiran Sharani

JD: Life is a little less terrifying today for members of the gay community in Brunei. Last month, the Sultan of Brunei announced a new punishment for gay sex. That punishment being death by stoning. Today, after pressure from around the world, the Sultan appears to be backpedaling a bit. He says that his officials will not enforce the law -- extending a moratorium that has been in place for decades. In April, when that law came into effect, Carol spoke with Shahiran Sharani -- a gay Bruneian who is seeking asylum in Vancouver. Here's part of that conversation.

SOUNDCLIP

SS: A lot of them are obviously scared. They feel threatened. Because homosexuality has always been a crime in Brunei, but nobody has ever been charged with it. And back then the punishment was like a jail sentence. Now they ratcheted it up. The likelihood of them getting caught -- because the scrutiny is much higher -- it's going to be much higher. They don't feel threatened in that they don't feel that they will incur the ultimate penalty of stoning because the burden of proof that is so high. But then I would remind them, they don't have to go all the way. As long as they could find maybe the Grindr app on your phone -- it's not that well-defined with what burden of proof they would need. But that alone could land them in jail for ten years. And that is horrendous. I'm a gay man -- the fact that I said that I am a gay man might land me in prison for ten years -- it just boggles the mind. But taking my situation -- if I ever were to go back to Brunei, I'm now kind of famous because I've spoken out on CNN and I've told everybody that I'm gay -- that is enough for the burden of proof. Burden of proof is like there are four witnesses to you having gay sex or you yourself confess to being gay. So if I were to go back, I'd be liable to be stoned to death.

CO: You're living in Vancouver now and you're hoping to be accepted in Canada as a refugee. But do you miss your country?

SS: Of course I do. It's a beautiful country. [Chokes up] I get like this when people ask me to speak about my country. It's a beautiful country. It's in Borneo and it has some of the most ancient rainforest in the world. And my grandfather taught me forest law. How to walk around the forest and how to relate to nature. I do miss it. [Cries] I'm sorry. Yeah I do miss it. It's a beautiful place.

CO: What are you telling friends back home?

SS: Yeah I'm telling them that they could leave like I did because if the new law is coming in -- they can seek asylum in any western nation -- places like Australia. They have condemned Brunei and these laws. And to think about that Bruneians -- there's only 500,000 of us -- if all of us left the country and sought asylum elsewhere, we would be easily absorbed. Like you know there's not many of us anyway.

JD: Shahiran Sharani is an asylum seeker from Brunei. He was speaking with Carol back in April. Today, the Sultan of Brunei said he would not enforce the death penalty for gay sex.

[Music]

Times Picayune buyout

Guest: Mark Schleifstein

JD: It has survived since 1837. But an era has ended for the New Orleans newspaper The Times Picayune. Last week, every single person on staff at the paper was told that they will lose their jobs at the end of June. The outlet has been bought by the owners of the rival New Orleans paper The Advocate. Environmental reporter Mark Schleifstein has been at The Times-Picayune for 35 years, and won three Pulitzer Prizes. We reached Mark Schleifstein in New Orleans.

CO: Mark what was the scene in the newsroom when you found out that everyone was getting laid off?

MARK SCHLEIFSTEIN: Well it was very sad as you would expect. Lots of crying. We have a fairly young staff and a lot of people were recognizing that they did not have jobs and are going to have to be struggling to figure out what to do next. It's very difficult.

CO: Did anyone see this coming? Was the paper up for sale?

MS: It wasn't told to us that it was up for sale in advance. They were very very few people on our side who were taken into confidence that this was in the works.

CO: This newspaper of ours -- The Times Picayune -- has been around since 1837. But it really was put on the map with your coverage of Hurricane Katrina. And you won Pulitzer Prizes for that. And a lot of recognition and support from your community. What part of your history does that coverage play for your newspaper?

MS: It is pretty significant. I mean you do have to understand that we're one of the very few papers in New Orleans that actually survived the Civil War. So there's a lot of history behind the name The Times Picayune. But yes in modern history our coverage of Hurricane Katrina probably was the most significant.

CO: Because I understand people they lived in the newspaper offices -- they had to. Sleeping bags and air mattresses, but it was traumatic stuff, wasn't it?

MS: Well it was more than traumatic to say the least. For Hurricane Katrina what happened was that we stayed in the building overnight and then we actually had to evacuate the building the day after the storm because the entire city was flooding and water from breaks in the levees had reached our newspaper building and surrounded us. It was already about four feet high around the building early in the morning on August 30th, 2005. And so we got in big delivery trucks -- in the backs of them -- and drove out of town. Some to Baton Rouge and others including me to Houma where the Houma newspaper allowed us to set up a temporary newsroom and we put out an electronic version of the paper that night.

CO: Your paper was a key place for people to go to get all kinds of information. They're looking for each other, trying to find out what was going on, the struggle, the looting, the desperation that people were going through. And you won a Pulitzer for that. That public service. So it was something that was integral to people's survival wasn't it?

MS: It was indeed. In fact we had about 8 million viewers a day online for the first month after the storm. You have to remember that the vast majority of the metro areas population about 1.2 million people had evacuated from the city and were far away. And so lot of those people didn't get back for as much as a year after the storm. And their only way of keeping up with what was going on was through us or through national media that also were attempting to cover things on a longer term.

CO: You had a lot of support in your community for your newspaper. A lot of newspapers are struggling to have that recognition. But I mean when you stopped daily circulation you had protests. You had businesses and people coming and saying no -- you have to be, publishing is a daily again. So with all that support how is it that you could be in the place where you are now?

MS: We're an unusual community in the fact that the public did come to the support of what The Times Picayune was and attempted to find people to buy it and made those kinds of efforts back in 2012. At the same time our owners felt that the future actually was online and that they were doing the right thing. As it turned out the economics didn't match their vision for New Orleans. And that's where we are today.

CO: So what's been the public reaction to the news that that you're gone?

MS: There are two pieces of that. The first one is that there continues to be both a combination of upset and praise to The Advocate for making sure that something still exists in New Orleans. And the other piece of it is that The Times Picayune -- the name --is going survive. The Advocate has made clear that the New Orleans tradition will continue to have that name there. And the other piece of that is that one has to remember that when John Georges the owner of The Advocate purchased that paper he immediately put in charge quite a few of former Times Picayune employees who used to be my editors and publishers and people in the business departments here. So it's more like the Times Picayune is dead -- Long Live The Times Picayune.

CO: But any news as to how many people might be rehired in this new configuration of The Advocate taking over The Times Picayune?

MS: I wish I did. That is the big question that everybody is asking. The reality is that The Advocate is accepting applications even as we speak. They began interviews today of our people who would like to go work there. They contend that they have slots open. How many slots? We're not sure. And I'm not quite sure they know it yet either. It has moved rather quickly.

CO: Well long live The Times Picayune if only in name.

MS: Well thank you.

CO: Thank you Mark. Bye bye.

MS: Bye bye.

JD: Mark Schleifstein is an environment reporter at the New Orleans Times Picayune. We reached him in New Orleans.

[Music]

Amanda Riddell

JD: It has only been a year but Amanda Riddell is already a powerlifting champion. This weekend, the Alberta woman -- who until a year ago had never power lifted -- broke three national records. And they were big ones. Ms. Riddell broke the national records in squat, bench, and deadlift. She spoke with CBC Calgary reporter Sarah Rieger about the achievement and what it was like to have her three young kids there cheering her on.

SOUNDCLIP

AMANDA RIDDELL: I have been training in powerlifting for let's say just about a year or just a little over a year. It's pretty amazing that I did my first powerlifting meet up in Edmonton in November and a lot of nerves came into play. And so for me to pull off what I did this weekend is just...I'm still comprehending it. I'm still in awe that I was able to complete it and to have such an amazing lift. Like all day it was so proud of myself.

SARAH RIEGER: Was your family there cheering you on?

AMANDA RIDDELL: They were. I had everybody from my in-laws, my parents, to the kids there. They've seen me you know picking up weights and we've gone to the gym with them and so they've seen a little bit. But to that extreme they were just kind of like "Wow! My mom's pretty strong." Yeah I've had you know a few people kind of look at me and just kind of roll their eyes and express like that I shouldn't get my hopes up because there's other people lifting more than I am or that I may not be good enough. And so I've just learned to use that and power myself to say, no! I'm going to do it and I can do it -- and not let that person's view or idea of me limit me or define me. So I will take all those negative comments and I'm going to turn them into something positive and say here you go. I can actually do it and I did do it.

JD: It's a winning mindset. Amanda Riddell speaking with CBC Calgary after breaking three national powerlifting records over the weekend. Ms. Riddell says her next goal is to break her own records.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

May 6, 2019 Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This