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 2023

The Current Transcript for May 3, 2023

Host: Matt Galloway

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

MALE SPEAKER: We are going to see the end for a very long time of the type of Arctic cooperation we had.

MATT GALLOWAY: There are many consequences to the war in Ukraine. Thousands dead, parts of a country reduced to rubble. Closer to home, the war's long tail is being felt in the far north. Russia makes up nearly half of the Arctic. And as the climate warms, scientific studies of the melting permafrost are crucial. In an hour, what the diplomatic freezing out of Russia in the face of its invasion means for collaboration at the top of the world. Also this morning, limits on screen time. Your letters on car makers responding to calls by drivers to get rid of those giant screens on the dashboard in favour of old school knobs and buttons. And later.

SOUNDCLIP

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: I like to thrust. Being in a compact body position, and you use your hands and unroll your body and trying to get as high as you can. And for my age, I'm pretty good at it.

MG: She sure is. Sue Baross Nesbitt is a synchronized swimming legend. She won just about everything in her youth. Now in her late 60s, she's continuing to dominate with fancy moves and an impressive ability to hold her breath underwater. A new documentary explores how seniors are using synchronized swimming to turn back the clock. We'll get into the pool in half an hour. We begin, though, with the debunking of a medical condition often cited in deadly police interactions. Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway and this is The Current.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

EXCITED DELIRIUM

Guests: Melissa Gray, Dr. Alfredo Walker, Dr. Michael Freeman

MG: In 2015, Myles Gray got into an altercation with a woman watering plants outside her home in Burnaby, British Columbia. Police were called. Gray died after a violent struggle with seven police officers. The officers did not face criminal charges. A coroner's inquest has now ruled that Myles Gray's death was a homicide. During the inquest, several officers testified they believed Gray was experiencing excited delirium, a state of agitation that is often cited as a cause of death in encounters with police. But many are now questioning the use of that term. Melissa Gray is one of them. She's Myles Gray's sister and she is in Sechelt, British Columbia. Melissa, good morning.

MELISSA GRAY: Hi, good morning.

MG: What was your reaction to the B.C. coroner's inquest findings into your brother's death?

MELISSA GRAY: Well, in 2020 when they said there would be no charges, we were just horrified. They said that the officers’ accounts were incomplete and inconsistent. And then they also cited the excited delirium and mitragynine, which is kratom. And since then, they found out actually that he didn't have detectable kratom in his body, and excited delirium isn't being recognized by the pathologist. So now we're sitting here two, three years later like well, that needs to be reinvestigated.

MG: What does it mean to your family that at the end of this inquest, your brother's death was determined to be a homicide?

MELISSA GRAY: Oh, that felt validating because we were sitting there listening to all these essentially lies by the 14 officers. And I thought, these are lies. Is anyone else realizing this? And obviously, the jury did realize that because they ruled it a homicide. They could have said it was accidental, but they called it homicide. So that felt like a big validation for us.

MG: Your brother, and this is difficult to say, but your brother suffered horrific injuries in this encounter with the police. What was the original explanation as to why charges weren't laid against the officers involved?

MELISSA GRAY: Well, like I said, they said that the accounts were incomplete, inconsistent. They didn't actually have a cause of death. It's all still very confusing to me because the pathologist has come forward and said that this happened by police force and holding him down to the ground so he couldn't breathe. So I'm like surely this needs to be reinvestigated now that like excited delirium is not a cause of death.

MG: Let me ask you about that because the pathologist reversed his opinion on that. There was a statement that was released in December of 2020 by the prosecution service that cites the forensic pathologist’s finding that your brother's death was caused by factors unrelated to the use of police force, but mentions this condition known as excited delirium as a cause. At that point, what did that phrase mean to you? Did you know anything about what excited Delirium was?

MELISSA GRAY: Well, I'm a psychiatric nurse, so I've heard of it. I mean, it's not medically recognized. It's not in the DSM, which is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. So when they threw that out there, I thought, of course they did. It's just a blanket term used for deaths in police brutality. And when they threw that out there, I thought, this is just such a cover up. And that's what we were left with. So I'm really just hopeful that now that he's saying that that is off the table, well, let's reopen this. Let's get some criminal charges.

MG: It was also cited, that notion of excited delirium by the officers themselves who testified. They talked about your brother having superhuman strength, muscles that had muscles, for example. And I just wonder when you heard that, how would you react when you heard that?

MELISSA GRAY: Well, I laughed. I thought, oh, Myles would love to hear that because he wanted to have muscles. Was he a big guy? He was 5.9, £185. Like come on. 14 guys couldn't hold him down, couldn't contain him? This is just to paint a picture that he couldn't feel pain. Well, first of all, what Did they know what he was feeling? Second of all, you could hear him screaming in the audio in the police… Sorry.

MG: Like in the recording?

MELISSA GRAY: Yes. Yes. In the recording, you could hear him screaming. So how can you say he doesn't feel pain? It was disgusting. They made it like he was the Incredible Hulk. They said they were hitting him with batons and it wasn't even affecting him. Well, I think that his injuries would speak otherwise.

MG: Yesterday, in the wake of the report from the inquest, the chief of police for the Vancouver Police Service released a statement through social media that said the coroner's jury has now delivered two recommendations for police. We will review them carefully. The recommendations build on processes underway or in place that are about looking at an up to date training on crisis de-escalation and mental health. They're currently implementing a pilot program to equip frontline officers with body worn cameras in the near future. They also extended their condolences on behalf of the force to your family. What would you want? In the wake of this, what would you want police to do now?

MELISSA GRAY: So many things. First of all, I like how he offered his condolences eight years later now that it's a homicide. Second of all, why do they not have mental health training to begin with? Like why is that a thing now that oh, okay, maybe we should investigate that? These are Vancouver police who work on the front lines. Like that is number one. You need to be able to understand what these people are going through.

MG: You said a couple of times that you want charges. What specifically? Now that your brother's death has been deemed to have been a homicide, you're looking for police to be charged?

MELISSA GRAY: Absolutely. Manslaughter, aggravated assault, anything. And at the very least, get them out of their jobs. They are still working. All of them are still employed. Some of them have had promotions. One of them works for Car 87, which is like a ride along service with a mental health nurse. Like it's embarrassing.

MG: Melissa, I'm glad to talk to you about this. This has been a really difficult period for your family and I’m thankful that you would take time to speak with us. Thank you very much.

MELISSA GRAY: Thank you.

MG: Melissa Gray is the sister of Myles Gray. There are many examples of excited delirium being used as an explanation for deaths after interactions with police. It was cited in the case of Robert Dziekanski who died after being repeatedly tasered by police at the Vancouver airport in 2007. It was cited in the death of Abdirahman Abdi, an Ottawa man who died in 2016 after a confrontation with officers, and in the death of George Floyd who died in 2020 after police in Minneapolis pinned him to the ground. Experts, though, are starting to call that defence into question. The National Association of Medical Examiners in the United States recently said that excited delirium should not be used as a cause of death. Dr. Alfredo Walker is a forensic pathologist and a coroner for Eastern Ontario, also vice chair and director of education at the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine at the University of Ottawa. And Dr. Michael Freeman is an associate professor of forensic medicine and epidemiology at Maastricht University in the Netherlands. He's also a professor of forensic psychiatry at Oregon Health and Science University. Good morning to you both.

DR. ALFREDO WALKER: Hi. Good morning.

DR. MICHAEL FREEMAN: Good morning.

MG: Dr. Walker, what is excited Delirium? This phrase is thrown around. What does it actually mean?

DR. ALFREDO WALKER: So excited delirium is a putative phenomenon which has been used traditionally to explain the death of an individual who dies during some sort of physical interaction with law enforcement. It's typically diagnosed as a cause of death after a post mortem examination in these cases. Typically, the victims are young adult males who suffered some form of physical restraint at the time of death. The literature has fallen out of favour with excited delirium as a realistic medical entity, and its proponents have described that the at risk victims are individuals who one, use large quantities of stimulant drugs such as cocaine or amphetamine, methamphetamine, are mentally ill, are paranoid schizophrenia or manic depression, tend to be noncompliant with their antipsychotic medications, exhibit bizarre behaviour that precipitates contact with the police and a police response, and they fail to then respond appropriately to police commands when police attend.

MG: Just briefly, how did this term come to be used in these sorts of cases?

DR. ALFREDO WALKER: So this has a long history in that the first mention of it in terms of modern day use dates back to a paper that was published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences by Fishbein and Whitley who were psychiatrists and forensic pathologists respectively at the University of Miami, in dissidents, a cohort of dissidents who died whilst intoxicated in cocaine. But there has not ever been any sort of rigorous analysis of these types of cases to establish diagnostic criteria. And it sort of evolved as a term that is used to explain the deaths of individuals who die after coming in contact with law enforcement, most times with some degree of physical restraint.

MG: Dr. Michael Freeman, you did an analysis of cases that cited excited delirium as a cause of in-custody death. What did you look at and what did you find?

DR. MICHAEL FREEMAN: We were looking to find out if there was evidence that excited delirium, the use of the term actually was associated with some unique ability to cause death or whether it was being used strictly as a proxy for restraint related death, prone restraint related death, I should say, when someone is handcuffed, face down and often has weight on their back or has their feet tied with their hands in what's called hobble restraint. And so we were interested to see what's been established in the literature. And we did an analysis of every single case that has been published where there was a description of the circumstances surrounding the death and the use of the term excited delirium.

MG: And what did you find?

DR. MICHAEL FREEMAN: We couldn't find any cases where excited delirium was a cause of death that was separate from restraint. You could say that what we looked to do was find out whether or not excited delirium caused death or death is what the cause of excited delirium was, that is it was used only after a death occurred with no evidence that it was present. There's no pathological evidence that excited delirium is a cause of death. There is no actual link physiologically between this concept of excited delirium and how a person might die from it.

MG: And so what's going on here? You said that this directs the gaze away from the cause of death to, you know, away from the issue of the restraining personnel if you're looking at the cause of death, that citing excited delirium is a distraction in some ways.

DR. MICHAEL FREEMAN: Precisely. So you have the behaviour which is deemed excited delirium, you have the restraint which is associated with the behavior, and then you have the death. And the term excited delirium allows you to basically leapfrog over the restraint, which is a plausible and realistic and known cause of death as restraint can result in acidosis and other issues that can physiologically become a cause of sudden cardiopulmonary collapse. Our gaze, as you say, gets turned away from that, and we look at the event that actually caused the restraint. And that's the problem. This is like waving a wand and saying we're going to take all the attention off the conduct of the police who were actually hands on this person when they died and point to something where we have absolutely no evidence, all we have to do is invoke the name. It's like waving a wand and saying abracadabra. There's no real association between the words and the magic trick. In this case, there's no relationship between the term excited delirium and the actual death.

MG: Dr. Walker, you're a pathologist. And so when you're dealing with a case where somebody may have died after an interaction with police, how do you go about determining cause of death? Can you just briefly explain that?

DR. ALFREDO WALKER: So the subspecialty discipline of forensic pathology deals with the determination of cause and manner of death. And with these types of cases, as a forensic pathologist, we have to take into consideration the circumstances of death, what are described by eyewitnesses, what review of evidence is there of the incident such as video footage, etc. And we then perform a post-mortem examination to identify any evidence of injuries, categorize the injuries which are present, any evidence of significant natural disease which could have caused or contributed to death in the scenario, as well as we perform toxicological analysis and any other ancillary investigation which is indicated. So at the end of the day, we have to look at the circumstances, the pathological findings in terms of injuries, natural disease and any drugs and toxins which are onboard and establish a cause of death from clinical pathological considerations, meaning we have to offer a cause of death that explains the death of the individual in the known circumstances in which they died on the background of the injuries sustained, natural disease and effects of drugs and toxic.

MG: How much currency do you think this phrase and this concept still has among police and law enforcement in this country?

DR. ALFREDO WALKER: Unfortunately, I think it's still a pervasive concept that will take some time to be eradicated from law enforcement. But hopefully, with the new position statement which came out last month by the National Association of Medical Examiners, that will take the process one step further towards eradicating its use.

MG: I was just going to ask Dr. Michael Freeman, we're running short of time, but from your perspective, as somebody who studied this, what have you seen in Canada? Because we did ask for comment from the Vancouver Police Department, from the RCMP about whether they still recognize excited delirium. We didn't hear back in time for this broadcast, but we do know that the Vancouver Police does mention excited delirium in their training models. So what does that tell you about how police are dealing with this and dealing with it in a way that reflects that changing thoughts that Dr. Walker has talked about from the National Association of Medical Examiners?

DR. MICHAEL FREEMAN: Well, I think we are seeing a change in how the term is being used. Certainly, medically, the AMA came out and issued a position paper saying we don't recognize excited delirium. It's a source of continued racist discrimination. It's used in a way that continues to cause problems for people in disadvantaged populations. I think that there is a trend that is moving away from it. The biggest problem I see for the police still using it is a failure to recognize that prone restraint is a potentially dangerous position to keep a person in, and that putting them into a recovery position on their side is something that every police officer needs to know about and needs to be aware because it is difficult for someone to breathe. And when someone says I can't breathe, you have to listen to them. You have to figure out how to get them in the position where they can breathe.

MG: And so what more needs to change? Aside from debating the efficacy of this term and the value of this term, what more needs to change so that people don't die in those sorts of encounters?

DR. MICHAEL FREEMAN: I think that it is better recognition of the danger of prone restraint, understanding this is a dangerous position to keep people in, potentially. Even though very few people die while being in prone restraint, it still has the potential to cause death in some cases. That obviously wasn't the case with Mr. Gray. Mr. Gray was essentially assaulted to death.

MG: We'll leave it there. There is more certainly to come on this in terms of what unfolds in the wake of this inquest and police practices in this country. In the meantime, thank you both for joining us this morning.

DR. MICHAEL FREEMAN: Thank you for having me.

DR. ALFREDO WALKER: Thank you.

MG: Dr. Alfredo Walker is a forensic pathologist and coroner for Eastern Ontario, vice chair and director of education at the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine at the University of Ottawa. And Dr. Michael Freeman is an associate professor of forensic medicine and epidemiology at Maastricht University in the Netherlands and a professor of forensic psychiatry at Oregon Health and Science University. Your CBC News is up next. And then, a conversation about ageing and myths around ageing. If you imagine, say, synchronized swimming, you probably picture young swimmers gliding through the water in unison. A new documentary hopes to break that stereotype. We'll meet some swimmers who are performing in sync well into their 60s and again challenging what we think we can do as we get older. I'm Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current on CBC Radio. We're back in about six minutes. Stay with us.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

UNSYNCABLE

Guests: Sue Baross Nesbitt, Ellen Scott, Megan Wennberg

MG: Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

MG: Still to come, the future of your car's dashboard, push buttons, touch screens. Your response to our segment on cars increasingly kicking it old school coming up in half an hour. But first, seniors in perfect sync.

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: I don't like to think about what the judges give me. I just try to block that part out and do the best I can. And if they appreciate what I've been putting together, the scores will reflect that. And if not, I'll just try harder next time. Nothing's devastating at my age except that.

MG: Sue Baross Nesbitt is a bit of a legend in the world of synchronized swimming. She is a world champion, former coach of Team Canada. And now in her late 60s, she's competing at masters level events. And she's one of the subjects of a new documentary about ageing ability and seniors who do synchro. The film is called Unsyncable. It’s screening as part of the Hot Docs Film Festival. And Sue Baross Nesbitt is with me in our studio alongside Ellen Scott, a master's level synchro swimmer from Kitchener, Ontario. As well, we're joined by the director of Unsyncable, the Nova Scotia filmmaker Megan Wennberg. Good morning to you all.

MEGAN WENNBERG: Good morning. Thanks for having us.

ELLEN SCOTT: Good morning.

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: Good morning.

MG: Thanks for being here. Can you describe, I mean, people might think they can swim. They can't do, most of them can't do what you do. Can you describe your favourite move in the pool and what it feels like to do that Thing, Sue?

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: I think I would take it down a notch and just enjoy being in the pool and what flotation does in the water. And once you appreciate that, the world is open to any move you want to do. But if I'm going to answer your question, I like to thrust. So that's being in a compact body position and you use your hands and unroll your body and trying to get as high as you can. And for my age, I'm pretty good at it. So that's what I like. If I'm an I just show you one move, that's what it would be. But floating to the average person who is a swimmer or not a swimmer is just a wonderful feeling.

MG: What do you love about that, about being in the water and I mean, whether it's doing the thrust or, as you say, just floating?

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: It's weightless. And under water, every pool has a different sound and it's either relaxing or it's just calming, very calming.

MG: Does that sound familiar, Ellen?

ELLEN SCOTT: Floating in the pool is amazing. And for me, I didn't start the sport until I turned 50. And at the time when I started, I was in a lot of pain from other health concerns and floating just reduced the pain. It eliminated it while I was in the water. And I would find that when I would get out of the water, it would be significantly reduced. So from, you know, living with a six out of 10 pain level, to have it drop down to a two or a one where it's barely on the radar at all is an amazing feeling. So floating, I certainly get that. Also being under the water, the calming part of being under the water is really amazing. You can't hear anything else. And unless you want to, you can put your music on.

MG: Why did you, I mean, what is it about what they're saying that is interesting to you, Megan? As a filmmaker, what's at the heart of that story for you?

MEGAN WENNBERG: For me, well, what they're like talking about, being in the water, I've always loved being in the water. I've never done synchronized swimming or artistic swimming. I tried it as a kid in the pool because we watched the Olympics and it looked amazing, but it was so hard. It turned me off immediately and I didn't like getting water up my nose, but yeah, I completely agree with just being in the water and that other world that you have access to. And visually for me, I love the idea of getting to make a film where we get to kind of explore also an underwater world, and synchro lends itself so beautifully to that.

MG: And this is a film. I mean, it's about synchro, but it's about people at a certain point in their life kind of continuing to pursue this.

MEGAN WENNBERG: Yeah. And that to me is the most interesting part, is getting to follow these incredible people as they're on this journey. And synchro is beautiful. But for me, it's really about their stories and what brought them to this and how they're continuing to excel way past. Like when people have these silly misconceptions that like ageing means decline and stopping doing things, these guys show that that's absolutely not true.

MG: And they didn't convince you to get back in the pool and try to learn how to do this stuff?

MEGAN WENNBERG: Ellen has been trying to get me in the water since we first met.

ELLEN SCOTT: The first 10 minutes of the conversation that we had on the phone, when are you getting in the pool?

MEGAN WENNBERG: Sadly, it was such a hectic shooting schedule there was never a time for me to just be like, okay, we're just going to take some time off while I learn synchro.

MG: That's a good excuse. It was too busy that I couldn't possibly.

ELLEN SCOTT: Yeah. I have to be the director. Yeah. Yeah. That has been her excuse all along.

MEGAN WENNBERG: Although actually, in California, I managed to get in the pool several times to cool off.

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: Yeah, it was pretty hot. They needed a little break.

MEGAN WENNBERG: Yeah.

MG: Sue, you are described by Ellen as synchro royalty.

ELLEN SCOTT: Yep. Yep, for sure.

MG: Can you describe to us how you got into this sport? You were very young when you started, but I mean, you were doing kind of racing swimming, like lap swimming and then moved to this world, right?

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: So I started at about five. There were three siblings older than me. And I think for my mother, it was a great place to just throw all the kids in and we would come back clean and tired. So we all continued to swim. My sister switched to synchronized swimming and I thought it was stupid because I was still pretty successful swimming fast. And then at one point, she and a friend of hers said, oh come on, just try it. And just trying it and them giving me instruction on how to make it feel better and to be more successful made me want to do it. So I switched.

MG: You have a closet full of medals.

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: And a cellar.

MG: And a cellar full of medals.

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: And after they visited, the documentary crew kind of thought it was bad that they were in the closet. So I actually hung them on my citrus trees. And it's really a nice thing, but the ones in the cellar are still in the cellar.

MG: When did you realize you were really good at this?

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: I don't think I even think that. I know the results say one thing, but I'm one of those people that there is no perfection and you can always be better. So on one level, I'm very happy with what I can do. But on the other side, which is a little bit more prevalent in my life, I just want to do more and be higher and faster and more extended and more flexible and more creative and all that stuff.

MG: What does being in the sport now give you? I mean, at this point in your life, to still be going, to still have high goals and a real drive as we see in this film, to get better all the time and to try and find perfection, what does that give you?

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: The ultimate goal is health, and this is my vehicle. So if I didn't do synchro and decided to go to the gym or lift weights competitively, you know, it wouldn't do it for me because I love the sport so much because it's artistic as well as technical. It just moves me to work harder and harder.

MG: You came into this, you said you were 50 when you started, in your 50s?

ELLEN SCOTT: Yes. I did swim since childhood, though. You know, I was taught to swim by my dad when I was a little kid. And I did racing all through high school and university and then took a break from kids. I did join Master Swim, but I injured my shoulder and it got really difficult to do front crawl.

MG: And so why synchro at that point in your life?

ELLEN SCOTT: Well, for one thing, when I watched it, I thought, wow, that's cool. And to me, when I watched it for the first time, really like Liv watching Master Swimmers, not the Olympic team, people that would scare you with the kinds of things that they can do that, you know, not those people, but just ordinary people my age from Kitchener swimming in a water show. And I thought, oh, that's so easy. I could do that. That's like so easy.

MG: Not so much.

ELLEN SCOTT: The first time I tried to make up my own routine, I had like a series of figures that I could do that was supposed to be a length, but I only practiced them in a very small area. So then when I tried to show it to somebody, to do the whole length, well, I couldn’t even get through half of it because it was all too much, too much. And it's a lot harder than it looks.

MG: What was the hardest thing to learn?

ELLEN SCOTT: I think probably the cardio to hold your breath. But I mean, there's a long list of things here, right? So you have flexibility, strength, endurance. All have to be there. You need cardio and a different kind of cardio. Anybody who runs or rides a bicycle or whatever, I suggest if you want to know what I'm talking about here, just hold your breath. Okay. So when you're jogging along and you're rolling along, just hold your breath and see how long you can hold your breath. I bet you won't make 10 seconds before you're really wanting to suck air.

MG: How do you go about doing that? I mean, people will watch synchronized swimming and one of the things is there's all of the various moves, but a lot of the thing that people are thinking about is how do you go about holding your breath while you're doing all of those things?

ELLEN SCOTT: Training for That took years. And yes, I definitely worked hard to train for that. I did a couple, a number of different things. One being using my bike to climb hills just to push to the cardio, to the really to the right, to the max of what I could do, cardio on land. I also tried to do lengths underwater, which of course, at first I couldn't do. I could maybe make 10, 15 metres at the most underwater. Now, mind you, when I was in my 20s swimming in university swim team, I could do 10, 25 metres underwater. And I could do it, you know, dolphin kick ups looking up instead of looking down. And I could do 10 in a row on a minute pace clock, but I couldn't do, you know, like to then come back to that at 50 was not really the thing.

MG: You were, and you've hinted at this, but you were dealing with some pretty serious health issues as well when you started into this, right?

ELLEN SCOTT: Well, yeah, I mean, postural. I'm a massage therapist now and in my textbook, almost half of it, it relates to how to treat people that have poor postural related syndromes and problems that result in them having pain, pain in their back, their neck, their arms, their lower back especially, legs, all those kinds of things. That all comes out, a lot of that comes out of poor posture. So I mean, this was kind of, you know, me like sort of hunched over. Like if you just look at Sue, look at her beautiful posture. I mean, she's not trying to do it. So it's muscle memory, right? It's muscle memory. Well, it took me a long time to develop that, years. Like I had this forward head posture and it was causing pain and numbness down my arms and into my fingers, like my ulnar nerve. This whole part of my arm went numb like just on and on and on. Of all the things, a lot of that stuff would be much, much worse without being in the water because being in the water really helps your posture, right?

MG: I was going to say, I mean, in the film, you talk about it gave you back this and gave you back that. And then at the end of it, you say it kind of gave you back everything. Like I just wonder what being involved in this has given you.

ELLEN SCOTT: Well, put it this way. When I first started going back to the pool when I was like 48 or 49, the doctor told me, go, this will help your pain. I was a disabled adult, right, with many limitations. So walking, getting off and on the bus, carrying laundry down stairs, not a chance I could do that. Sometimes I just put it in a bag and throw it down the stairs and then walk after it. Like no way could I do that. Walking 200 yards. So many things. So many things. And then gradually, I was able to do more and able to walk for 15 minutes or able to do this. When I first started Synchro, I mean, I was going to these in the gym on land classes as I'm terrible on land, and I would have to literally sit in a chair and I'm in a gold class. So these ladies, like some of them were 85, and they're coming up to me because I'm sitting in a chair and I can't do the class. And they're all running around the gym and they're coming by, just keep going. It's okay. Just keep at it, you know? You're going to get it. You're going to get it. So I started to really admire these people in their 80s that are still able to do this kind of stuff, right? I mean, the oldest synchro swimmer in Canada is 93 this year. I saw her swim the year she turned 90. She was having cataract problems. Her coach led her on to the bulkhead, and then she dove in to the pool and swam a routine to some old school musical song, Lucky Lips or something. And so she's like blowing kisses to the audience and everybody's just like going crazy, standing ovation, you know what I mean, 90 years old. So this is now my goal because I see how healthy people are involved in this sport. I mean, high 80s, you know, grabs a back sack off the bench, slings it over shoulder, walks down the pool deck, you know.

MG: What did you learn about what this sport can give people, Megan, in making this film?

MEGAN WENNBERG: Oh my God. So it went so much deeper than I had any understanding of. Like the community aspect I think is so important. Like getting to see you guys with your teams and the Tsunami team and the Harlem Honeys and Bears.

MG: Tell us about those teams because those teams are really interesting and they show perhaps a side of synchronized swimming that people might not know about, the diversity that's there, that's in a sport that people may not see. So tell us about those two teams.

MEGAN WENNBERG: Yeah, absolutely. So the other two teams that we followed were San Francisco Tsunami, which they started as a gay men's swim team in San Francisco in the early 90s because they were just looking for a safe space to swim. And Chris Meier-Windes who was one of the founders, he wasn't able to do synchro as a child because he was a boy. So it was close to him, but it's something that he'd always been interested in. And then after he lost his partner, he's like a champion speed swimmer, but he switched to Synchro because it was too sad to keep doing the sport that he and his partner had done. And he's extraordinary. Like he's an incredibly, incredibly fit man, so strong. So he brings a lot of strength to synchro in terms of what he's able to do. For him, he struggles with the choreography. So it was really interesting to like meet him and his team and just to get to see men doing the sport because like I had never seen that before. And it was the same actually in New York in Harlem. The Harlem Honeys and Bears are the only all-Black team in North America, and they have been around also I think since the 80s. And Luther Gales is the assistant coach and he's 82 and he's one of the fittest people I've ever met in my life.

MG: It is not like, I mean, not that you know what 82 looks like, but I don't think anybody would peg him as 82.

MEGAN WENNBERG: No. Ever. Yeah. No. And he and Monica and Joyce who are the three main members of that team that we followed are just these incredible people and just so full of life. And in a lot of ways, like it felt like hanging out like with teenagers or contemporaries or just yeah, it really hit home that like age really is nothing but a number. And that to me was so extraordinary just in terms of thinking about, like I turned 40 during the pandemic and that freaked me out, which sounds kind of silly because it's not that old, but yeah, just seeing that, it's like yeah, all the stuff we've been fed about ageing is crap and there's so much more you can do and you just need to choose it and keep going and find something that you love and other people that love it too.

MG: Sue, how important is competition in this? We see competition in the film. At this level, at this point in your life, what does competition mean to you?

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: A necessary evil.

MG: A necessary evil?

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: I'm working to be more fit. And I think by having the competition as not the goal, but it's a test. Competition's not my favourite part because especially as an elite, not so much from the elite category, but masters, I think everybody is a winner that competes, actually registers and competes. They're winning. And I know that I win and I know second place wants to win and I know third wants to win. And I don't care except that I want to continue to get better. So if there was some way to figure it out that we could all just swim and people could, a clap metre or I don't know, everybody will get a gold medal because I don't like the they want to beat me, you know, or.

MG: But there's still something motivating to you about that.

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: Oh yeah.

MG: Yeah. And you want to win.

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: I don't know not winning.

MG: Yeah.

ELLEN SCOTT: I don't know not winning. That sounds right. I don't really know what it's like to go into something like that and not win.

MG: Yeah.

ELLEN SCOTT: But you know what? If it was a clap metre, I would win. I would win all the time on the clap metre.

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: Oh, that would be great.

ELLEN SCOTT: It would be. It is wonderful.

MG: What does it mean for you? I mean, we see you getting ready for this competition.

ELLEN SCOTT: I’m a total showboat.

MEGAN WENNBERG: Do you like attention?

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: Do you think this is news to us?

[all laughing]

ELLEN SCOTT: You know, I'm a total showboat. When I was a little girl, my favourite thing was mommy, mommy, look at me. Look at me. I just love it. I'm a total showboat. So for me, competition is no pressure because I'm expecting to come last. I'm going to be very happy to come last. I'm actually like really proud to come last because really, that means that I got there, I completed the routine and I went all the way to the end and I wasn't disqualified for any reason. I mean, that's a huge win for me. And I go there because there's people there involved in synchro and I get to talk to people and it's amazing and talk about my signature move. You were talking about a signature move. If I have a signature move, it's waving to everybody. So all the other people walk out onto the stage in this really formal way, in a special walk, and then they turn and they look this way and that way and it's all very formal and then they make this big pose. What I do is I kind of limp like this and walk in very small careful steps so I don't slip. And then when I get out to the middle, I turn around and like wave to the audience with a big smile. And of course, everybody goes crazy when I wave. So I don't know, for some reason. But I mean, it's just because I talk to everybody that I get probably, you know, everybody knows who I am. I'm such a showboat.

MG: What does this film, you've hinted at this, just finally, I mean, what does it tell us about ageing, do you think, and what's possible and ability? Somebody says at the beginning of the film that they do this to show that they're still in the game.

MEGAN WENNBERG: Yeah. Yeah. That's Luther. Yeah. Everyone had some really great lines. I think it tells us that yeah, it can be what you make it. And even like, I mean, Ellen is so inspiring in the sense that like she was in so much pain and had so many limitations but worked so hard to come back from that and to really start excelling. Like it's incredible. And then seeing lifelong athletes like Sue and Luther and Chris just continue to be at an extraordinary level. Like it means, I guess to me, it's like it's both things. It's like it's never too late to try something new and explore something you might love, and it's never too late to go back to something that you used to love maybe as a kid or in your early life and like give it another go and yeah, just keep going.

MG: And try to stay fit. I mean, what did you say? You say the goal of this is to prolong your life in many ways.

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: Yeah, definitely.

MG: Which sounds like what we all want, but definitely we're not all upside down in the pool.

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: But you don't want to just prolong your life. You want to have quality of life, which to me means being able to walk wherever I want to walk and do all the normal things for myself. So that's keep active.

MG: Can you imagine your life without this, Ellen?

ELLEN SCOTT: I can and I don't like it, so I just really push that away. Yeah. I can't. I can't imagine it. I don't like that idea. I like the idea of staying active and stuff. Sue's talking about quality of life. It's given me such motivation. People say that I give them motivation or find they find me inspiring, but I find for me, the motivation to do the sport has really improved my health. For example, in the video I used to do that quote in the movie where I go, I don't want to be old. I want to be old. And if you notice visually, the difference is posture, right? Old, I'm all bent over and old, I have good posture. My head is up. I mean, when I first started, I was kind of like hunched over. So when I would try to spin, you can't spin with your head out of a line. You kind of orbit then. You can't spin straight unless you can get your head and shoulders straight. So I mean, I spent three years, you know, doing like a whole range of exercises religiously. And you know what? It worked. It took a couple of years, but I managed to correct a lot of that postural problem. And it's reduced the pain. And it's also given me something to be proud of that I can stand up, you know.

MG: It's really great to see what you are capable of doing and thank you for telling us all about it.

SUE BAROSS NESBITT: Thank you.

MG: Thank you. Thank you.

MEGAN WENNBERG: Thank you so much for having me.

MG: Thanks for being here.

ELLEN SCOTT: Thanks a lot. Thanks for listening.

MG: Sue Baross Nesbitt is a world champion synchronized swimmer. She's also the former coach of Canada's national synchronized swimming team. Ellen Scott is a master's level synchro swimmer from Kitchener, Ontario, and Megan Wennberg is the director of Unsyncable. This film is screening as part of the Hot Docs Film Festival. Well, coming up after your regional update, war in Ukraine is first and foremost a human tragedy, but there have been consequences well beyond the frontlines. For example, in research in the Arctic. The Future of Arctic Cooperation without Russia. We'll discuss that coming up after our break. I'm Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current. We're back in 90 seconds. Stick around.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

CARS AND BUTTONS MAIL

MG: Hello again. This is The Current. My name is Matt Galloway. Last week, we talked about buttons, the kind of buttons you actually push. Remember those? Some car manufacturers are ditching those big touchscreens in favour of old fashioned buttons. You know, I could say that this is a hot button topic for listeners, that it pushed your buttons. I won't say that. I just did actually say that. Never mind. The Current’s producer, Kate Cornick, is here with some of your mail. Kate, good morning.

KATE CORNICK: Good morning, Matt. This first letter is from Janet Hogg. She writes, “I have a real problem with the screen notion because they are so big and in most cars, are significantly higher than the dash. If someone is tall, it might not be an issue. For me, it is an outright obstruction of my view when driving. I had the same type of car for 40 years and could no longer buy one because of this monster-sized screen. I looked for three years for a new car, wondering if new models might offer a different screen feature and recently bought a different make only because of the less problematic screen. I like the phone feature of being able to have the phone come over the speaker, but that's it.”

MG: Murray Duncalfe from Brandon, Manitoba, writes, “While I enjoy the info screen on my car, I am against the automakers putting more and more of my car's functions on it, especially heating and cooling. I change those settings frequently. The old style analogue dials work best. Only half a glance, you turn a knob for either fan speed, temperature adjustment or defrost by level floor. Easy-peasy. If it all goes into the info centre, it will be a major pain to get the info right. It’s inconvenient and unsafe as it draws too much attention away from paying attention to the road. Sometimes analogue is best.”

KATE CORNICK: The next letter is from Parksville, B.C. Tim Allix writes, “I recently bought an Audi Q5 to replace my 2010 Mustang. However, the computer screen in the centre console is definitely a driver distraction. For example, if I want to turn my heated seats on or off, first, I need to search for the right button. Then I need to navigate to the right section of the computerized menu. And there are 14 buttons and knobs related to climate control. Once in the heated seat module, I have to turn a knob to select one of the six heated seats settings. Also, my Audi doesn't have an oil dipstick. The oil level information can be accessed through the computer screen only. If I open the hood, a sensor disables my oil level readout for several days. There is a complicated procedure to reset the oil level functionality, which was not covered in the owner's manual. No one should have to use Google or YouTube to understand their car. I wish car makers would return to simple knobs and buttons. It would make the cars both safer and more affordable.”

MG: Elaine Boychuk writes from Edmonton, “Screens definitely don't work well for those who need to use hand controls, people who are unable to use their legs to regulate acceleration and braking. My husband has MS and uses hand controls to drive as his legs are not physically capable of using the brake and accelerator. One hand uses the lever to control the brakes and the gas pedal, the other hand controls the steering wheel. A touchscreen is not usable at all while he is driving.”

KATE CORNICK: The next letter is from Michael Melville. He writes, “I'm a veteran auto technician. I will never own a modern vehicle with a single screen to control everything. It's all the eggs in the same basket thing from a maintenance perspective. If the screen has an issue, you're dead in the water to control your car and you're at the mercy of dealers that don't have the maintenance facility coverage like independents.”

MG: Touchscreens did get a little bit of love from Crystal Smith. She's from Ontario but was listening to our segment from her Tesla in Virginia. “Yes, there is a lot to learn the first time you drive a Tesla, but the easiest, most important thing to learn is about the little button on the steering wheel. If you haven't customized your screen to your preferences but want it to do something like Turn Your Wipers on, you can simply ask the car and voila, the wipers turn on. Want them to go faster? Push the easily accessible button and tell it to wipe faster. The large screen is way easier to glance at quickly when checking a map for directions. The screen responds immediately when tapped. I wouldn't go back at all to the buttons.”

KATE CORNICK: And finally, Sharon Howes writes, “I have every intention of buying an electric vehicle. But after test driving two different models within the last year, I have decided I'm not ready yet. One of the main reasons was the necessity to look at the screen for various functions. Authorities tell us we shouldn't be checking our phone screens when we're driving, and these vehicles don't give us much choice but to look at the dashboard screen regularly. Maybe I'm old fashioned and not terribly tech oriented, but if we're all going to be required to have EVs in the not too distant future, which I'm very much in favour of environmentally, I think car manufacturers are going to have to figure out a simpler version that more people can be comfortable with.”

MG: Kate, thank you very much.

KATE CORNICK: Thanks, Matt.

MG: Kate Cornick is a producer here at The Current. You can comment on anything you hear on this program. Get in touch. You can send us an email, thecurrent@cbc.ca. Or record the sound of your voice through a voice app and then send it to us. Just a voice memo would be perfect and just email it to thecurrent@cbc.ca.

[music]

UKRAINE WAR AND ARCTIC RESEARCH

Guests: Chris Burn, Evan Bloom

MG: This is The Current on CBC Radio and the CBC Listen app. My name is Matt Galloway. As War in Ukraine continues, scientists are warning of unintended consequences far from the frontlines. The Arctic has been a hub for scientific exploration and a model for international cooperation for decades. However, with the invasion, researchers have lost all access to Russia's Arctic territory and the crucial scientific information coming out of that land. Chris Burn is the Chancellor's professor in geography at Carleton University and the president of the International Permafrost Association. Chris, good morning.

CHRIS BURN: Good morning, Matt.

MG: What is the state of scientific collaboration with Russia today? Is there any connection that you can have or communication with scientists in Russia?

CHRIS BURN: Well, it's a very good question because within the permafrost community, we have just been trying to deal with the consequences of the invasion of Ukraine. As you know, there are many sanctions that have been imposed by different countries against Russia and particularly against Russian institutions. And so it's very, very difficult for institutional cooperation to take place. But there are relatively few sanctions that target individuals. And so many of the countries, the 24 countries in the International Permafrost Association, while they recognize the importance of official connections being paused or frozen, if I may use that word, at this point, the importance of the person to person connection has never been emphasized more. I think partly because we know at some point, this situation is going to come to an end. And at that point, it will be very important to re-establish our connections and our work together.

MG: And how close were those connections before the invasion?

CHRIS BURN: Between some countries, very close. So between the Europeans and the Russians, there was very close connection. There are many Russian scientists working in Europe at the moment who were there before both the pandemic and before this invasion took place a year and a bit ago. But between Canada and Russia, there are not as many connections, and certainly not in the permafrost world, very strong connections. Between the Americans, interestingly, and Russia, there were a number of joint projects, particularly one that was targeted specifically at the carbon problem with respect to permafrost, and that one has had to be suspended and their work rerouted to be dominantly in Canada and Alaska.

MG: Let's talk about what you're not able to do without that collaboration. Fellow scientists said that this comes with very bad timing because of the state of the climate crisis and what's happening with permafrost. So how has the lack of collaboration impacted your work?

CHRIS BURN: Well, the most important international issue in permafrost at the present time is the question of what will happen to the carbon, that is the soil carbon that is locked up in the top metre or so of the ground within the permafrost itself. At the moment, it's frozen and the carbon does not degrade. It's not released as CO2 or methane into the atmosphere. But we anticipate that within the next 10 to 15 to 30 years, there will be a substantial release of carbon from permafrost into the atmosphere. And some people estimate that that might be equivalent to the third largest economy in the world. In other words, China and The States produce the most carbon emissions, but we think permafrost will be third in terms of the world. Now, Russia has about 22 million square kilometres of permafrost. We have about six million square kilometres. We're number two in terms of how much permafrost we have, but they have four times as much as we do. And so the question of how much carbon will come out of the ground in the varied terrain, which is Russia and within the understandings that we have of the Russian condition and of the permafrost condition are ones that need to be calibrated very carefully to the range of terrain conditions that we find in Russia. And we simply can't do that at the moment.

MG: So what's happening now is essentially an absence of research.

CHRIS BURN: At the moment, what happens is that people do a lot of thinking. There's a lot of work that's going on potentially with the use of Canadian stations. There are some Canadian stations, but more that will be established in the next 24 months because the Russian facility, the Russian area is unavailable to us. People are continuing to develop their understanding of what carbon and permafrost will do in the future. And people can do laboratory work, but laboratory simulations are only a glimpse into what will happen in the field.

MG: Do you know whether any research is happening right now in Russia as this war unfolds?

CHRIS BURN: Yes. We know that the Russians are the largest number of permafrost scientists in the world. They have something like 2000 permafrost scientists and engineers up working. In contrast, in Canada, there are about 50. So in Russia, there are 2000 people. And during the last two years when Russia held the chairmanship of the Arctic Council, they were anticipating a substantial amount of activity between their scientists and ours, both ours in Europe and ours in Canada and ours in the United States. So they didn't stop any of that work. But what has stopped is the communication between those scientists and us in the West and to an extent, between those scientists and the Chinese, but not as much of an impediment with China as there is with the Western countries.

MG: At what point would we see the impact of this loss of data and loss of collaboration? If the work is happening, but it's happening independently in some ways and you're not able to get together and as you say, spend time thinking about it, when are we going to see the impacts of that?

CHRIS BURN: I think the impact will come within the next two or three years. And the reason is this is a relatively fast moving field. There were ideas that were produced in 2019 that at the time were the state of the art, but we've revised them subsequently. At that time, we thought that the permafrost regions were a source now of carbon emissions to the atmosphere, but that was revised subsequently partly because the modelling or the theoretical understanding of what happens within the permafrost environment was adjusted slightly. And because it's such a large area, a very small adjustment in the way that we understand the world can have a substantial impact. And that's the principal problem, is that we're dealing with a very, very large area which we need to calibrate in not just a consistent, but an accurate and precise manner. And it's the problem with precision, which is the difficulty that is posed to us. So we've now revised our view that maybe it's in 10 or 15 years that the permafrost regions become a net source of emissions to the atmosphere. But that was different four years ago. Well, that was a different view four years ago. So it's that sort of pace of change which will suffer because of the lack of access to the Russian environment.

MG: And again, it's the scale of the issue. I mean, we were in Yukon last year and seeing the permafrost degrading and seeing little, you know, bubbles of carbon coming up. I mean, it's happening now in some ways.

CHRIS BURN: That's right. And the location where you were in the Yukon near Dawson City is an area where there's a large amount of carbon. You can see the buried grasses, the buried wood, you can see the buried peat that's in there in the permafrost. And there are similar environments in Russia, but there's also a very large area where the peat is, where the amount of buried organic material is not quite as great as what we have in the Klondike, but nevertheless is sufficient at that scale because of the size of the area that's involved to have a substantial impact. As I say, something equivalent to what would be the third biggest emitter in the world.

MG: Just before I let you go, do you have to start to now plan for what happens when this war ends so that you can resume that sense of collaboration? Again, the work is happening, but you can't. There would be consequences, I'm sure, if the scientists were to reach out and be in contact with people in Canada now. But you have to try to plan for that for when this war ends, right?

CHRIS BURN: Well, there are two very important things. The first is that we don't want to make the situation any worse. And so if we start to issue statements against Russian scientists, many of whom we think don't have anything to do with supporting the war, but we need to keep our rhetoric in such a way that it doesn't lead to problems down the road. So that's the first thing. And the second is that there are occasions where Russian individuals are able to come to the West and particularly they will come to a conference. A few of them will come to a conference that is scheduled for northern Spain in June and potentially also to Whitehorse in June next year. And in those environments, we need to reassure the individuals that on the scientific level, we are all working on the same problem and we are all pulling in the same direction because ultimately, climate change is one of the existential problems of the 21st century.

MG: Chris, I'm really glad to talk to you about this. Thank you very much.

CHRIS BURN: Thank you, Matt.

MG: Chris Burn, Chancellor's professor in geography at Carleton University, president of the International Permafrost Association. He was in Ottawa. Aside from the scientific research that this war has created a vacuum in, there is also a vacuum when it comes to diplomatic relations in the Arctic. Evan Bloom is a senior fellow at the Wilson Centre nonpartisan Public Policy Forum. He's in Washington, D.C. Evan, good morning to you.

EVAN BLOOM: Good morning.

MG: We were just hearing about the scientific, as I say, vacuum, the lack of collaboration that's happening because of this war. From a diplomatic perspective, given the fact that Russia makes up almost half the Arctic territory, what are the consequences of losing communication with such a huge player right now?

EVAN BLOOM: Well, Russia is a very important player in world diplomacy, in international organizations and in the kind of scientific work that your previous guest just mentioned. And so it has a huge impact on the relationship among various countries, in particular the eight states that make up the Arctic Council.

MG: You helped establish that Arctic Council. What isn't happening when it comes to diplomatic relations? I mean, put it in a granular form, if I can put it that way. What's not going on in terms of those discussions and those movements?

EVAN BLOOM: Well, as you pointed out, the Arctic institutions used to be working relatively well. And it was thought that the Arctic was not really an area of conflict. And then we hit this kind of speed bump in international relations. And the result is that the Arctic Council isn't really functioning anymore. There are a series of projects that don't relate to Russia that continue to go along. But in terms of pan Arctic cooperation and political relations, those have really stopped. And as a result, a lot of work that relates to the relationship among the various countries just isn't happening anymore.

MG: How has the war changed the conversation around Arctic sovereignty?

EVAN BLOOM: I don't think it's changed the discussion around Arctic sovereignty very much. The Russians continue to have their thoughts about their interests in the Arctic. But in terms of the relationships, the political relationships, those have basically come to a halt.

MG: What about issues of security? Partially, I ask because I mean, there's these balloons that are floating over parts of the Arctic, but you just wonder if those diplomatic channels aren't open or as open as they were in past, what conversations aren't happening when it comes to sovereignty, when it comes to security, when it comes to the potential of perhaps militarization in that region.

EVAN BLOOM: Well, I think a number of those conversations, as you suggest, are not taking place. With NATO's expanding, with Finland having joined NATO and Sweden on the cusp of joining, that’s something that is quite disturbing to Russia, as you can imagine. And the various fora where there could be discussion of say Coast Guard cooperation and other security type contacts aren’t coming forward very well. So at the same time, Russia isn't likely, Sorry, the Arctic isn't likely to be a place where we can expect that there will be actual conflict in the near future, but we need to be mindful of the dangers.

MG: Norway is about to take over chairmanship of the Arctic Council?

EVAN BLOOM: Yes.

MG: What will that do in the absence of Russia or perhaps in the midst of this war to create perhaps some channels of communication? Is there a possibility here for future dialogue?

EVAN BLOOM: I think there is a possibility, but it's a very delicate thing because the Arctic Council was created as a body of eight states, including Russia, and it operates on the basis of consensus. And as a result, and one of the reasons that the Arctic Council work had to be paused is it wasn't possible for Russia to be part of the governance of the council anymore. So as the focus shifts to Norway, they have to find a way of having Russia acquiesce in the continuing work in the council, but not to make concessions to Russia politically that would make it seem as if they're being rewarded for their invasion in Ukraine. And that's a very difficult task.

MG: You co-wrote a piece in November looking at the future of Arctic relations. And one of the questions that you asked is could you have an Arctic Council without Russia? Would something like that work?

EVAN BLOOM: So I don't think it really does in the sense that the Arctic Council is a panoptic institution that depends on all eight states. I mean, one of the things that is important to understand is a great deal of Arctic cooperation does continue in the absence of Russia. So if U.S. and Canadian scientists want to cooperate, they can do that now. And those sort of relationships do continue.

MG: But again, when Russia controls half the Arctic, you wonder how meaningful that is.

EVAN BLOOM: Well, I think it is meaningful in the sense that there is a lot of great work going on outside of Russia. But it is true that without Russia, you do miss a lot, especially on the kind of climate change infrastructure and permafrost issues that your prior speaker was mentioning. So it's a very important and significant loss to the international community to not have Russia involved in this. And yet, there is some very strong scientific work and cooperation that goes on without Russia, nevertheless.

MG: And so I guess just finally, I mean, one of the other things that you raised in that piece that you co-wrote was with this war unfolding and Russia out of the broader international community in the West, certainly, do you create a new body to look at managing Arctic relations? Could you do something like that or would that actually be effective?

EVAN BLOOM: So I think it might be effective in the near term. But at some point, one hopes that there will be a return to normal diplomacy. And in that event, we've already put 25 years into the Arctic Council. So I would hesitate to do anything that undercuts the ability of the council to somehow begin its work again at some appropriate point in the future.

MG: Does something like this remind us of the importance of a part of the world that those in the South perhaps don't pay nearly enough attention to?

EVAN BLOOM: Yes, absolutely true. The cooperation in the Arctic has been a model for international work, and it needs to come back again.

MG: Sooner rather than later, hopefully. Evan Bloom, thank you very much.

EVAN BLOOM: Thank you very much.

MG: Evan Bloom is a senior fellow with the Wilson Centre. He was in Washington, D.C. This story is part of CBC's ongoing focus on our changing planet. If you'd like more information on solutions needed to make a difference, you can find that at cbcnews.ca/climate. That's The Current for this Wednesday. Q is up next on CBC Radio One. In the spirit of collaboration in the North, we’re going to leave you with something from Danny Michel. In 2016, the great musician recorded an album while travelling through the Northwest Passage on board a boat called The Kapitan Khlebnikov. 24,000 horsepower Russian Soviet era icebreaker. In that space on that ship, Danny Michel made a studio, drew inspiration from things that were around him and wrote a record all about life in the Arctic. From that record which he named after the boat Khlebnikov, Danny Michel and 24,000 Horses. I'm Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening to The Current. We'll see you tomorrow.

[Song: “24,000 Horses” by Danny Michel]

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

Wednesday May 3, 2023 Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This