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 September 25, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Ali Hassan

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello I'm Carol Off.

ALI HASSAN: Good evening. I'm Ali Hassan. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

AH: Tonight...

CO: Well, it's quo -- but is it "status" or "quid pro?" A White House memo details that phone call between U.S. President Donald Trump and the President of Ukraine -- Mr. Trump says it's clearly innocent, but our guest says it's a clear abuse of power.

AH: Pipe-ularity contest. Andrew Scheer says the next prime minister should assert the national interest in building a pipeline through Quebec -- and our guest says that's why Quebec has no provincial interest in Mr. Scheer.

CO: From sea to rising sea. The latest major report on climate change focuses on the effects of warming waters on the humans who rely on them which it turns out is all of us.

AH: Poetry and motion. The late Al Alvarez moved from a career as an influential poet and critic to a career as an author who dealt with everything from poker to mountaineering to suicide.

CO: Changing the tenor of the conversation. After accusations of sexual harassment, Placido Domingo boughs out of future performances at New York's Metropolitan Opera -- some Met employees say his curtain call is overdue.

AH: And from "that old thing?" to "the thing's that old?" A painting that was just hanging in a French woman's kitchen turns out to be more than 700 years old and painted by an Italian master. As It Happens. The Wednesday Edition. Radio that guesses when it came to art she had at least one major hang-up.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: Painting found in French woman's kitchen believed to be 13th-century Cimabue worth millions

Impeach Trump memo

Guest: Evan McMullin

AH: We now have a pretty good idea exactly what U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said to each other in that already infamous phone call. This morning the White House released a memorandum detailing the July conversation. In it President Trump emphasizes how much the United States has helped Ukraine. And then he asks the Ukrainian leader for assistance on several fronts including an investigation of Joe Biden and his son, Hunter. This afternoon the two leaders spoke to the media at the United Nations. Here's what President Zelensky said when asked if he felt any pressure to investigate the Bidens.

SOUNDCLIP

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKY: I think you read everything. I think you read text. I'm sorry but I don't want to be involved to Democratic open, elections -- elections of USA. No, you heard. We had I think good phone call. It was normal. We spoke about many things. So I think you read it, that nobody pushed. Pushed me.

DONALD TRUMP: In other words no pressure. Because you know what there was no pressure. And you know there was...and by the way you know there was no pressure. All you have to do is see it what went on the call. But you know that. But you could ask the question and I appreciate the answer.

AH: President Trump and President Zelensky speaking to reporters at the U.N. today. Evan McMullin is a former CIA officer and former Republican policy advisor. He ran against President Trump as an independent in the 2016 elections. We reached him in Washington D.C.

CO: Mr. McMullin we just heard both the President of Ukraine and President Trump saying there was no pressure. It was a good call. And there is nothing to investigate. So how do you square that with what is in this phone call memo?

EVAN MCMULLIN: I think it squares actually quite nicely with what's in that memo because if you read it you see that Zelensky -- this new president of Ukraine, he's a political rookie but understands that what's at stake for his country, for Ukraine, in terms of the U.S. relationship and in order to continue to secure that he's got to ingratiate himself to President Trump and to win actually his personal support because even if Congress is approving as it has on a bipartisan basis support for Ukraine, if the president isn't also supportive then Ukraine doesn't actually see that assistance. There is then in this interview with Trump standing by his side also trying very hard to not offend the president or to expose the president any further than he already is.

CO: And you hear in the phone call memo he says 'I'm so grateful for what the United States is doing. We're trying to drain the swamp here. We want to be helpful. What can we do? How can we investigate? Give us some help with this.' In this phone call there's a lot in it. What worries you the most? What do you find the most unsettling in this transcript?

EM: Well there's a lot there but one thing that I really keyed in on was the point at which Zelensky says, 'we are ready to buy additional missiles -- Javelin missiles -- from the United States.' There's more to that than I think meets the eye. When foreign countries especially like Ukraine buy U.S. weapons from the United States -- if they're receiving U.S. assistance often what that U.S. assistance is essentially money to buy U.S. weapons for themselves. So we say we're going to give you 100-million dollars but instead of writing them a cheque and sending them 100-million dollars we say we will pay for your quote unquote purchase of U.S. weapons, we'll pay for that, the weapons will go to you but we're paying for that. And that's how these deals work. And Zelensky is saying this support is important. And then the president responds immediately 'well but we have a favour to ask of you though.' And I think that's the moment where a quid pro quo was really established. But perhaps even more dangerous than that -- and I think more to the point in all of this -- is simply that the President of the United States in his role as president is asking a foreign power -- a foreign government -- to help his election -- his re-election prospects -- by digging up dirt whether justified or not on his main political opponent which has been Joe Biden. Just lastly the other thing -- I'm sorry -- that is concerning and surprises that Trump raises the issue of CrowdStrike which was the cyber security firm that identified the Russian attack on the DNC. And Trump is asking for help essentially to discredit that information -- that narrative -- that Russia was responsible for those hacks. And that was a surprise actually -- I don't think a lot of people saw that coming.

CO: Those are the two things he's asked him to investigate: the CrowdStrike issue and also Mr. Biden and his son. And says that he'll help. He'll send the Attorney General and Rudy Giuliani to talk to him about that and see how they might help him out -- to help President Zelensky out in that way. Now President Trump of course says there was no quid pro quo because he never explicitly linked any American funding to Ukraine in his request for an investigation. So is that a valid point?

EM: No. I really would push back on that. I'm reading from the transcript here and this is President Trump responding to Zelensky's statement about being almost ready to buy more weapons from the United States. President Trump says quote, "I would like you to do us a favour though." The "though" in that sentence does a lot of work.

CO: There is also an issue of what the tone of this conversation is. And there are more than a few people who are saying that it is kind of like reading something from The Sopranos -- including we heard from Adam Schiff, the head of the House Intelligence Committee, who makes a similar statement here. Here is Mr. Schiff.

SOUNDCLIP

ADAM SCHIFF: There was only one message that that President of Ukraine got from that call. And that was, 'This is what I need. I know what you need.' Like any mafia boss, the president didn't need to say that's a nice country you have, it'd be a shame if something happened to it.

CO: Okay. That was Adam Schiff. Did it strike you the same way?

EM: Yes. Look I would say that the president although he did establish a quid pro quo explicitly in this conversation he actually didn't need to do that. The quid pro quo is obvious. Ukraine is in a desperate situation. They obviously share a border with the Russian Federation which is hostile to them. They desperately need U.S. support. The president was aware of that. Zelensky is obviously aware of that. And the quid pro quo didn't need to be explicitly stated because it is the primary factor in the context for the call in the first place. It's sort of like if you or I walked into a doctor's office, the receptionist wouldn't say "Would you like to see a doctor?" The receptionist knows you're there to see a doctor. And I just think that we can't lose sight of that -- that the context here is the desperate desire, the desperate need that Ukraine needs for U.S. assistance, and that's the whole context for this engagement. It's truly unfortunate.

CO: We will leave it there. Mr. McMullin thank you.

EM: Thank you.

AH: Evan McMullin is a former CIA officer and former Republican policy advisor. He was in Washington D.C.

[Music]

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) water report

Guest: Sherilee Harper

AH: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is a scientific body. And by now, their projections about rising sea levels and other impacts of climate change are all too familiar. But in a new IPCC report released today those warnings -- about the modelling and the data, the likely scenarios and the unlikely ones -- are accompanied by the findings of social scientists. They're part of a working group that normally releases its report separately from those of the physical scientists. Sherilee Harper is an Associate Professor of Public Health at the University of Alberta, and one of the co-authors of the new IPCC report. We reached her in Monaco.

CO: Professor Harper why was it so important in this report that we should learn about the social implications as well as all the data on climate change?

SHERILEE HARPER: Well I think that what this report does for the first time is that it makes it clear that it doesn't matter where you live in the world, the impacts that climate change has on the ocean and cryosphere impacts everyone. There are things like sea level rise, melting glaciers, melting permafrost, and sea ice loss, as well as ocean warming, and ocean acidification. And all of these things have really important impacts on things like our economy, on our infrastructure, on our culture, and on our livelihoods. And one thing that's really interesting from my perspective as a health researcher is the impact that it has on our health. So I think that for the first time this report is bringing together these pieces in a unique holistic way to show us how climate change is impacting everyone.

CO: This is for the future of our oceans and cryosphere -- you used that word, that basically means frozen stuff, right?

SH: That's right. So those are things like sea ice, permafrost, anything that's frozen in the world.

CO: What's alarming about this report is the data that show that no matter what we do, we've already moved into a very very bad place for a lot of people. Can you tell us about what's already happening because of the warming oceans and climate change?

SH: So for instance the report looks at research that assesses the impacts of climate change on things like food safety and nutrition. And some of the research that we assess coming from Canada looked at how climate change will impact things like food borne disease from seafood. So things like shellfish poisoning and how that will increase moving into the future due to warming ocean temperatures. And even in a low emissions scenario that increase is expected to be about 17 percent but in a high emission scenario it's projected to be about double that -- about 36 percent. And so what this report does for things like food safety and other things is look at our future, look down the road, to see how climate change will impact us as a society under low and under high emissions scenarios but also what types of things we can do to adapt and reduce some of those impacts.

CO: You are an expert in public health. So what are the implications for humans and their well-being? What problems in public health realm do you see in the immediate future and in the years to come?

SH: Well the impacts of climate change on health are really wide ranging everything from the water we drink to the food we eat. But nutrition is also another really important element. So if climate change is reducing our ability to catch fish, if it's decreasing fish size, fish production and fish abundance, that means that we'll have less access to fish which has really important nutrition impacts. And we've already started seeing those impacts on nutrition and on food safety in the past 10 years or so.

CO: You also look at something that we don't associate with climate change -- which is quite extraordinary -- is that it will have an impact on mental health as well. What do you say and what have you learned about that?

SH: So for instance in the Arctic the changes in the climate, change the environment. So things like ice thickness has decreased and permafrost is creating things like infrastructure damage and all of these things impact people's day-to-day lives. If people are not as easily as able to go out and access the land and go hunting or fishing and you know bring that food home, that causes stress. Also if you're out on unsafe conditions that also causes stress and anxiety for the people who are out there.

CO: There are people in this country and elsewhere who will argue that there are climate change winners and losers. Their arguments I'm sure you've heard them that Canada could be a place where there's a longer growing season because of climate change. What do you say to those who make those claims?

SH: Well this report was really thorough and very rigorous. The science became really clear is that there is a net negative in terms of climate change. Absolutely there'll be some communities who are more vulnerable to those climate change impacts. But the other thing that was really clear in this report is that we're all impacted by climate change. The science was very clear that impacts on health and wellbeing, on culture, on the economy is a net negative.

CO: We have been following and covering the reports from the IPCC for many years and others have done even longer -- we can look at those reports. They always have a kind of cool analysis, there is always an effort because you are scientists but it seems increasingly that the IPCC is getting more emphatic about the consequences of what we face. Do you think there's a place for the IPCC to actually come out and say 'come on people we're in trouble?'

SH: The IPCC reports that come out sequentially over the years have increasingly looked bleak in terms of our future but that's because that's what the science says. And I mean I think that our job is to assess the science and present options for decision makers and I think that that's what we've done.

CO: Do you think that climate change should be a bigger priority in the present federal election campaign in Canada?

SH: I have to say that it's now more than any time in the past -- climate change has been a really important issue to the public. And we see that with the youth who have been on Climate Strike. We see that by the increasing media coverage on climate change. And I think that reports like this help paint a picture of what the climate change impacts are and what our future could look like.

CO: And do you think that that's something the politicians should be heeding more and talking more about in this election campaign?

SH: You know I have a lot of hope. I think that people are interested in climate science and they're interested in using the science to make evidence-based decisions and I hope that no matter who wins in this election but they'll consider the evidence just like other countries are.

CO: We'll leave it there. Professor Harper thank you.

SH: Thank you so much.

AH: Sherilee Harper is one of the co-authors of a new report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. We reached her today in Monaco.

[Music]

Cimabue painting

Guest: Stephane Pinta

AH: An elderly woman in northern France was hoping to clear out her home before moving away. Which is always a bittersweet process. Except in this case the bitter part is harder to feel after an auctioneer spotted something she might have been about to throw out. It was a small painting on wood, hanging on the wall between her kitchen and her dining room. It's now believed that that painting dates back to the 13th century. Stephane Pinta is an art expert at the firm and gallery Cabinet Turquin. We reached him in Paris.

CO: Mr. Pinta what did you think when you got a call from this auctioneer saying that she'd found something that might be of interest to you?

STEPHANE PINTA: Of course we were very excited by the call of the French auctioneer. She said during a routine house clearance -- she just remarked that, and I had a good feeling with that and I just wanted to show it to you.

CO: What did you think it was when you first saw it?

SP: We had goosebumps when we had the picture in hands. And we just understand that this was something probably major. Probably very impressive and very emotional. And even it was hard to say in the first second that the picture was by Cimabue. We just had a feeling that the picture was very important and very early. It's a very very early picture. We thought first it could be by an artist like Giotto or Duccio or maybe earlier. And the only name that could be suggest if we could confirm that that picture was earlier is Cimabue -- the great, the giant, Cimabue. And the rest was quite easy. The attribution was quite easy because we have two part of this diptych that now has been who partly disappeared. We just have found a third piece. We know two pieces of this puzzle. The first one was the picture [which] is now in the Frick Collection in New York. And it's the same size panel -- exactly the same as ours. And then nothing happened until 1999 when a second panel of the same scale and the same dimensions was found in a chateau in England. Obviously it was evident that the picture was by the same hand and was part of the same diptych.

CO: So this painting that you suspect is by this master, this Byzantine era painter Cimabue. And that it's part of a series. What's the picture of? Can you describe what is the image?

SP: The image of our painting is "The Mocking of Christ." You have in the centre of the composition you have Christ with a very quiet attitude and he's surrounded by a huge crowd of people [who are] very angry. Of course the picture was said to be an icon of the Byzantine period by the current owner. But that's exactly what Cimabue changed in the history of art. He took the Byzantine painting through the new modern Western art. He just changed everything. And he introduced the movement. He introduced the perspective. And he introduced, too, the facial expressions in faces. And that's exactly what Cimabue changed in the history of art.

CO: What have you been able to gather in the way of evidence that it is a Cimabue?

SP: The two panels are exactly the same size and quite the same composition with the same faces and the same ground and the same line up at two centimetres from the border. You have a line made with a lot of little dots that we call [term in French] we call that in French and this is exactly the same in the three panels and they had the same dimension, the same ground, the same hallmark with this little punch. And you have -- what is probably the most important -- you can reconstruct what was probably the position of the three paintings in the two wings of the diptych.

CO: So if this is a Cimabue way it could be worth millions of dollars. And some are saying like the Guardian's art critic Jonathan Jones is questioning well you need to do a lot of research, there have to be a lot of experts signing off on something like this before you boldly call it a Cimabue. Have you done that?

SP: Yeah of course we have done that. Every specialist who saw the picture here [was] absolutely astonished and nobody doubt the authenticity of the picture.

CO: How did it come to be in this woman's house?

SP: We don't know exactly. This was just a building dating from the 1940s-50s maybe and a very elderly woman has absolutely no element to give us to trace the picture. And we know that probably the diptych was cut in eight parts and probably sold separately in the beginning of the 19th century -- probably in the 1820s. The one in London bears a little label on the back with a price in English that means that probably the picture has been bought by family in maybe the beginning of 19th century with this price of...

CO: It wasn't much. It wasn't what you would get for a Cimabue.

SP: [Laughs] No -- I'd be happy to buy it at that price.

CO: Having been hanging all this time just outside the kitchen, what condition is it in?

SP: It is in excellent -- surprisingly -- it's in excellent condition. Excellent. What is also surprising it is in the same condition than the one in the London National Gallery. But never been touched from centuries probably. And x-rays photo just shows some very very little dots of restoration in the eyes of some of the faces we can see. And the rest is in perfect condition. Very dirty, but the gold ground is original -- and everything is really perfect.

CO: And so this goes out for action. Any idea when it will be up on public display?

SP: It is being auctioned on the 27th October in Senlis. Senlis is just a few kilometres away from Compiegne where the picture was found.

CO: And how much do you think it might fetch?

SP: A lot. We gave an estimate of four to six million euros. But honestly there has never been any picture by Cimabue at auction. Never.

CO: All right. We'll be watching. Mr. Pinta thank you.

SP: You're very welcome.

AH: Stephane Pinta is an art expert with Cabinet Turquin, a firm and gallery specialized in Old Master paintings. We reached him in Paris. And if you want to see pictures of that painting we've got them on our website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Chance

AH: If you've pulled off a brilliant heist and you got away with it, you may feel like gloating. It's not a nice instinct -- and probably not a smart one -- but let's face it it's human nature. Which I assume is why someone wound up biking through downtown Prince George, BC a few days ago wearing a large stolen dog mascot costume. Everyone in the vicinity saw the huge dog person pedalling along, its tail dangerously close to the back wheel. But a few intrepid observers also saw a clue -- a potential link to a recent robbery. A couple of weeks before, someone had taken a dog mascot costume belonging to the Prince George Humane Society from a van. The mascot is a husky named "Chance". Was it possible that there was some connection between that theft and this large cycling dog? Strangely enough there was. And in the end the costume thief's hubris would lead to a big break in the case because the thief apparently kind of hung around downtown just doing stuff until the police arrived. Now Chance has been returned to the Humane Society. Albeit in a state that will require a thorough cleaning. Well replacing "Chance" would have cost up to 5000 dollars and the Humane Society doesn't have a backup. So there's a lot of relief that the mascot bandit's audacity led the police straight to the costume. Because if they'd missed that opportunity there would be no second "Chances."

[Music]

Part 2: Flirtatious, foul-mouthed and 'incredibly clever': Remembering writer Al Alvarez

Pipelines Quebec

Guest: Guy Lachapelle

AH: Andrew Scheer was in Jonquiere, Quebec this morning. The riding is up the Saguenay river -- north of Quebec City. It's in a region where the Conservatives say they can pick up seats. While he was stopping by, Mr. Scheer was asked how confident he is that Quebecers share some of his beliefs.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: A lot of your own views differ with Quebecers notably on same-sex marriage, the environment, Energy East pipeline, and Bill-21. Isn't that a major hurdle for the Conservatives to actually win votes here in Quebec?

ANDREW SCHEER: Not at all because Quebecers know and Canadians know that we will not reopen those types of issues -- those social issues. That has been a very clear commitment. And I know that here in Quebec, Quebecers would prefer to purchase Canadian energy instead of oil and gas coming from the United States or Algeria.

VOICE 1: But they don't want Energy East. I mean how do you fight that in addition to the resurgence of the Bloc Quebecois in these regions that you're visiting?

ANDREW SCHEER: Quebecers support energy projects. Quebecers support the growth of clean technology like natural gas. I know that Quebecers -- every survey shows that Quebecers would rather purchase their oil and gas from Canada instead from Donald Trump's economy or instead of from Algeria. So I'm quite confident with our energy quarter that we can help create the types of conditions that will provide a win-win for Western Canadian energy and for Quebec's own hydro electricity.

AH: That was Conservative leader Andrew Scheer campaigning in Jonquiere, Quebec earlier today. Guy Lachapelle has been watching the politics of pipelines play out in the federal campaign. Professor Lachapelle teaches politics at Concordia University. And we reached him in Montreal.

CO: Professor Lachapelle, Andrew Shearer says that it would be his job as prime minister to assert the national interest in building a pipeline through Quebec. What happens to voters in Quebec when they hear that?

GUY LACHAPELLE: Well essentially they turned their back to the Conservatives. They don't want to take the risk of having a Conservative government [that] will impose on Quebec a pipeline. Same question about what Mr. Scheer said about, what about selling electricity from Quebec to Ontario? So there's a lot of debate that if this is open I think that will raise a lot of concern among voters. And most voters say okay who is the best party who can defend our interests on that issue and this is I think part of the equation in this election. So that's where the Liberals are very clear: they are buying a pipeline. I think the Trans Mountain pipeline. Everybody that don't understand the nationalization of a pipeline in the 21st century -- seems to be as the policy of the day. And that costs money. And who is paying for that? Quebecers are paying. All Canadians are paying for that. So somebody should I would say, ring the bell and say wait a minute -- is there a kind of a double standard in Canada?

CO: Who then -- who is running in Quebec, which party does it benefit? If the Liberals are saying, we are going to spend four and a half billion dollars on a pipeline we have already. And the Conservatives are saying well we might have to -- in national interest -- have a pipeline in Quebec. Who benefits from that kind of talk in this election campaign?

GL: I think the Bloc is going to benefit from that. And this is what we've seen today in the last poll. The Bloc is ahead now among Francophone voters at 29 percent. It is first in many riding outside Montreal. Of course the Bloc saying clearly that there is no question of having a pipeline -- make that issue kind of a single issue of this campaign. And I think that will appeal to a lot of voters in Quebec. I think Mr. Legault and the member of his government were said not to talk about that, to remain relatively quiet in this campaign. But I'm sure Mr. Legault is pleased to see that the Bloc in a way will defend as they said the Quebec interests in Ottawa. So that's part of that. Also the Green Party in Quebec is quite divided on that issue. Mr. Green -- one of his main candidate for years -- have said there's no question of a pipeline even on the Seine River. So it seems that there's a kind of constant in term of the talks over a pipeline that I would say the bottom line it cannot be done unilaterally and it has to be done in collaboration with the National Assembly, the parties, and more importantly they should have a support of the population. Does it mean that there should be a referendum on that issue? I don't think so. But it means that the voters will certainly question. And we'll see I think in the televised debate it will certainly be one of the key issues.

CO: There's another party, another leader...Jagmeet Singh who is also saying he will not interfere with Quebec on pipelines or on Bill-21. He has been the most emphatic in this election about how provinces should have their own jurisdictions. So why has that not improved Mr. Singh and the NDP fortunes in Quebec?

GL: Because we are not at the time of Jack Layton or even Thomas Mulcair. I think that Mr. Singh represent a kind of tradition in the NDP where Quebecers are not sure the NDP now will really represent Quebec voters and Quebec interests. I think that's a bit difficult. But of course Mr. Singh as we know and it's very clear, I think the question of any religious sign in this campaign even Mr. Singh is perceived as a very decent man, very decent leader, capable of changing things, with a good personality among Quebec voters. But still the question of religion is is harming him in this campaign...

CO: Because he wears a turban -- you think that his fortunes are sinking because he wears a turban?

GL: Absolutely I think that is for people -- Bill-21 essentially a talk about the neutrality of the states and this legislation we can like it or not -- the question is that the Legault government is surfing on this legislation and he has the approval of the population not only in Quebec but also outside of Quebec. So that raises a question about a kind of neutrality in our institutions and that's I will say it is not personally an issue for Mr. Singh but it is more how we represent about the place of religion in our political debates. And I think that's an issue that is always on the fringe. It doesn't have an impact on even individual rights or whatever -- it is just when you work for a federal institution and you are in authority who would decide essentially is it the individual right or when you work for the state to work for the collective interests. So how do you reconcile individual rights with collective interests and that's the fundamental question I think beyond that.

CO: So even though Jagmeet Singh and the NDP represent the interests of Quebec, are talking openly about how they would protect those interests, all those things that matter a great deal to Quebecers -- they would still reject him because he wears a turban. What does that say?

GL: Not only that, it just says also that did the NDP was efficient in defending Quebec interests with all the seats that they have in the past? I think people are questioning the efficiency of the NDP. And voting in general for a third party. How third party can really be representative of the Quebec population. The fact that the NDP has kicked out Mr. Mulcair. Quebecers have a tendency to vote for Quebecers. And we can like it or not. And also that I think this is his first election so there's a question here of trust.

CO: Yeah but the Bloc Quebecois is not going to be the government either so that argument that the third party is not going to have power doesn't make sense if they are to Bloc Quebecois for their interests.

GL: No it depends if it's a minority government who has the balance of power. We have seen that before in Canadian election. All parties are necessary in our democracy. I don't think there's one more than another. I don't know if it's the Liberals who are elected and the balance of power -- and you have the Conservative as the opposition. So is it the NDP? Is it the Bloc? Is it the Green Party? It's a question now of the number of seats that the opposition would have. Maybe if the minority government and the opposition need the support of two other parties including the NDP and the Bloc to get legislation passed and that makes things more complicated. So this is our electoral system. So we have to live with that and accept that. That's democracy.

CO: All right we'll leave it there. Professor Lachapelle thank you.

GL: My pleasure.

AH: Guy Lachapelle is a professor of political science at Concordia University. We reached him in Montreal.

[Music]

Boris Johnson

AH: There was no shred of remorse from Boris Johnson today in the UK House of Commons. Yesterday the UK Supreme Court ruled that Prime Minister Johnson had acted unlawfully when he shut down parliament. And when parliament reconvened today the Commons was chock full of vitriol on all sides. Here's the Prime Minister taking shots at Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn -- and goading the opposition Leader over his refusal to call a general election.

SOUNDCLIP

BORIS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker that right honourable gentlemen is being gagged. He's been muzzled. He's being held captive by his colleagues. They won't let him say what he wants to say. I say Free The Islington One, Mr. Speaker. Why won't they allow him to have an election, Mr. Speaker? Why won't they allow him to unleash his charms on the electorate? Is it because they are not only terrified that he's going to lose but also even more terrified by the remote possibility that he might win? He can't control his own party. He can't decide whether he's for leave or for remain. He's being held captive by his colleagues. The electorate are being held captive by this zombie parliament and this zombie opposition and he wants the entire country to be held captive in the EU after October 31st at a cost of more than a billion pounds a month. We say no! I say no! Let's get Brexit done. And let's take this country forward.

AH: Order! That was Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn had this in response to him.

SOUNDCLIP

JEREMY CORBYN: Mr. Speaker he says he wants a general election. I want a general election. It's very simple: if you want an election -- if he wants an election, get an extension and let's have an election.

AH: Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn responding to Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The Scottish National Party's leader in Westminster, Ian Blackford told MPs the Prime Minister is acting like he's above the law. Here's what he said.

SOUNDCLIP

IAN BLACKFORD: You know we're here today because the Prime Minister was utterly humiliated by the Supreme Court by a count of 11 to 0. And you might have thought in that diatribe that we had that we might have had some humility, that we might have been able to acknowledge that what we've had is the unlawful shutting down of Parliament Mr. Speaker. Sorry is indeed the hardest words for the Prime Minister. It was said by a former Prime Minister "Where law ends, tyranny begins." And Mr. Speaker while it pains me to say it, the fact the prime minister is still standing here today -- he in fact does believe he is above the law. Well Mr. Speaker he is not.

AH: Scottish National Party leader in Westminster, Ian Blackford, addressing the UK's House of Commons today.

[Music]

Al Alvarez obit

Guest: Alexandra Pringle

AH: He did it all. And he wrote about it. Al Alvarez originally made his name as a poet and critic. But Mr. Alvarez who also went by A. Alvarez spent the second half of his life writing about everything from mountain climbing and professional poker to his own divorce and suicide attempts. During a decade long stint as poetry editor of The Observer in the 50s and 60s, Mr. Alvarez championed younger poets such as Ted Hughes and Sylvia Plath -- who were relatively unknown at the time and later became his friends. Mr. Alvarez died this week from viral pneumonia. He was 90-years-old. Almost 20 years ago he joined Sue Lawley on the BBC program "Desert Island Discs" where he spoke about pursuing a career in literary criticism.

SOUNDCLIP

AL ALVAREZ: I'm talking about late 40s. So when literary criticism was thought to be a kind of decent profession. You know my son the literary critic was not quite as good as my son the doctor but maybe on a par with my son the dentist, you know. Now of course it's a nightmare. And then there are the university people who are only interested in the process of criticism...

SUE LAWLEY: The salt mine of intellectualism according to you.

AL ALVAREZ: I think that is...

SUE LAWLEY: Out of touch with reality.

AL ALVAREZ: Yeah -- there is a great quote in Joyce Cary's "The Horse's Mouth" where he's talking about a piece of abstract art and he says it's like farting Annie Laurie through a keyhole -- it's very clever but is it worth the effort?

AH: From 2000 that's the late British poet and critic Al Alvarez speaking on the BBC's "Desert Island Discs." Alexandra Pringle is the editor-in-chief of Bloomsbury Publishing, and a friend of Mr. Alvarez. We reached her in London.

CO: Ms. Pringle as you hear Al Alvarez speak in that clip what comes to mind for you about your friend?

ALEXANDRA PRINGLE: It's absolutely wonderful. It just brings him back so vividly. He was the funniest man I've ever met. And he just couldn't stop wisecracking.

CO: You met him 20 years ago, is that right?

AP: Yes I did. We were publishing a little book that he'd written about poker. Not the big one. The biggest game in town. But a fun book that he'd done. And he sort of swaggered into our lives.

CO: What were your first impressions?

AP: I was immediately captivated by him. I'm afraid that I have a tremendous weakness for a funny men. And there he was, very short, had a strange kind of barrel chest, a big nose, and a big mouth. And he made me laugh immediately and I was completely captivated by him.

CO: And he was what? 70 at the time?

AP: Yeah. He was in his early 70s. Yes. And I was in my late 40s. And he was happily married and in a wonderful phase of his life.

CO: Charismatic, attractive -- that's what others have said. You would agree obviously.

AP: Yes absolutely. He was flirtatious. He was foul-mouthed, incredibly clever. And it was like life was a fight and a round of fun all the time for him.

CO: When we heard the tape of Al Alvarez he's talking about his early days as a critic. He was also a poet, a poetry editor, and of course what he was able to do for the careers of some very important poets when they were younger I guess most notably Ted Hughes and Sylvia Plath. What did he mean for their careers?

AP: Well I think that for all poets, then and now, their lives are spent largely in the wilderness. And Al had this very unusual job on The Observer because he had the freedom to publish poetry in a national newspaper which was rather remarkable thing. And he got a real buzz out of publishing new names. He wasn't that interested in English poetry which I think he thought was too genteel. So Ted Hughes was an unusual one. I think he felt that the American poets people like Robert Lowe were the most exciting because they had a kind of energy and anger and ability to transmit grief and fury that British poets on the whole didn't have. So what he did was he just backed them. He published them. He got them heard in the world and that was very very precious.

CO: I want to ask you a little bit about his relationship with Sylvia Plath. What was his relationship with her?

AP: He was a champion of hers but he was also a close friend. She, in her unhappiness and her fury, turned to him. And I think that he felt that he had failed her because he was unable to step forward and help her. He of course had himself tried to commit suicide two years before Plath's own suicide. And perhaps it was all too close for him.

CO: What effect did Sylvia Plath's suicide have on him?

AP: Devastating. It was absolutely devastating and I think in some ways he felt a little responsible. And he'd seen her so soon before she died.

CO: In what way did he feel somewhat responsible?

AP: Because I think he felt that he had failed to support her. He'd failed to give her what she had needed. None of us know when in these moments. But as suicide naturally has that effect on people who are close to them you know whether it's family or close friends.

CO: What's extraordinary about him is that experience became material that he needed to write about that whatever went on in his life or he encountered from poker to whatever, he would turn into extraordinary prose, didn't he? Which he also did with suicide -- The Savage God: A Study of Suicide, was something people turned to understand what leads someone to that.

AP: Yes. And they still do it. It's the classic book. The wonderful thing about Al is that his interests were so various they led to so many different books. As you said mountain climbing, big on oil rigs, dreams, and night time. You know there were just so many different things that caught his eye. And he had always this insane manic energy -- as he said he was an adrenaline junkie and he talked about feeding his habit as "Feeding the Rat" which was the title of his book about mountaineering. He also flew planes. You know he gambled enormously through his life. Though I think he did stop losing very large sums of money when he had settled down a bit.

CO: But then how did he come to write what is considered to be the greatest book about poker ever "The Biggest Game in Town." His insights into that ambition are really quite extraordinary, aren't they?

AP: Yeah. But that was because he was an intellectual as well as a gambler. And he could express these things in literature. Not many people who gamble have that gift.

CO: When was the last time you saw your friend?

AP: I saw him about a year ago. By then he was in a wheelchair. He couldn't walk at all. He had had a stroke. You know he was pretty decrepit but he was always funny about it. One of his lines was "I'm past my sell-by date." He sat in his chair and he made me laugh as he always did.

CO: If there is one particular memory that you cherish about your friendship with Al Alvarez, what is it?

AP: It's the memory of the night that we celebrated the publication of his last book "Pondlife" which was a book about swimming in the Hampstead ponds. A book about aging and love and relinquishing life. And there he was -- he'd so not relinquished life. It was late and guests were starting to leave and he put some jazz on and stood up with his wife and he could really hardly stand. But they swayed together, their fingers touching, and their love was absolutely palpable. And I remember sitting there thinking this is the most romantic relationship in the world and that's really how I shall always remember him.

CO: Ms. Pringle I'm sorry for your loss.

AP: Thank you.

CO: But I thank you so much for sharing your memories about Al Alvarez with us.

AP: It's been such a pleasure.

AH: Alexandra Pringle is the editor-in-chief of Bloomsbury Publishing in London which is where we reached her. She was also a friend of British poet, critic, and essayist Al Alvarez, who died on Monday. He was 90. And we've got more on the life of Al Alvarez on our webpage: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Part 3: Placido Domingo accusations

Placido Domingo accusations

Guest: Anastasia Tsioulcas

AH: First it was a mezzo-soprano named Patricia Wulf, and eight other unnamed women who each told Associated Press journalists the same story: that the world-famous tenor Placido Domingo had sexually harassed them. Then other accusers started coming forward including one more who was willing to share her name -- soprano Angela Turner Wilson, who said Mr. Domingo grabbed her breast in a makeup room. Now the curtain seems to be falling for Mr. Domingo and he has announced that he will not appear onstage at New York City's Metropolitan Opera this evening. Anastasia Tsioulcas is a music reporter for NPR. She's spoken with employees of the Met on the condition of anonymity. And we reached her in New York City.

CO: Anastasia we've been hearing these allegations for weeks. Is this a sign that the accusations are finally catching up with Placido Domingo?

ANASTASIA TSIOULCAS: Well I think it's important to know that Placido Domingo has always maintained that he disputes these allegations of these 20 women and in the note that was sent to Met staffers just yesterday he said again that he disputed the way that women characterize the allegation.

CO: And yet he is not going to perform. What's been the reaction to the news that he won't perform tonight?

AT: I have heard a lot of support for his withdrawal -- and some very angry, very disappointed, fans as well.

CO: What are the allegations against him?

AT: The allegations range over the course of about 30 years in alleged incidents that range from pestering and continual sexual advances to groping a woman's bare breasts. In my reporting I talked quite a bit with sources inside of the Metropolitan Opera -- performers and employees at the Met -- and they said that they were very taken aback that the Met seemed to handle the women's allegations quite cavalierly. And not very long ago in December of 2017 the very long-term music director of the Met, James Levine the conductor was suspended and then a few months later fired because he had been accused of sexual abuse by nine men in a variety of alleged incidents. The Met staffers I talked to said well the Met took action in that instance -- why are we talking about accusations from 20 women and the Met isn't even doing its own investigation?

CO: And what's the answer to that question?

AT: Well it's interesting. One of the things that my reporting uncovered is that Peter Gelb -- the general manager of the Met -- held a closed door meeting this past Saturday in which he tried to explain to the assembled staff his rationale. And one of the things he said -- and it wound up even fueling more rancor -- was that the 20 women's accusations were in his opinion not corroborated. And he said -- and I'm paraphrasing -- if these were real accusations another major media outlet would have picked up the ball and tried its own investigative journalism.

CO: Okay. Well let's look at one of the cases in which one of the two women who has been named, has presented herself soprano Angela Turner Wilson. What does she allege happened between her and Placido Domingo?

AT: So she was performing at Washington Opera in D.C. during the 1999-2000 season. And she alleges that while she and Domingo were having makeup applied he suddenly reached into her costume and grabbed her breast and groped her. And it was strong enough to make her cry out in pain. And one of the things she said and that the AP tried to follow up on was that a makeup artist in the room witnessed this. The AP reported at the time that they approached this makeup artist for corroboration and he said he did not recall the incident and that he declined to comment further. It's interesting that you bring this up because in this meeting fast forward now to this past weekend and the meeting with Peter Gelb at the Met, Gelb told the assembled staff the makeup artist said it didn't happen. And that's also as I just said not what the AP reported at the time at all.

CO: But Ms. Turner Wilson and the other women are describing -- these aren't isolated cases. They say the kisses, the hugs, the grabs, the gropes -- they say that he was just hanging around, trying to get them. There's a lot of that, isn't there?

AT: I will say that in my own reporting speaking to Met Opera employees in New York a number of sources who in my case were all anonymous they said at the Met over the years there has been a whisper network about Placido Domingo and these sources told me, women at the Met -- certain women at the Met -- went so far as to change their work schedules so that they would not have to perform with or collaborate with Mr. Domingo and that would be a detriment to their careers.

CO: We're not just talking about someone who is a very very large artist, very talented artist, very famous person. This is a man with a great deal of power. So what do you make of the fact that the Met would actually do this -- suspend performances? What does that tell you about how far this has gone?

AT: Well I think we're seeing the Metropolitan Opera and other arts organizations having to grapple with this. It's interesting to me that almost simultaneously with this situation with Domingo coming to really a boil, the Royal Opera in London announced that it was suspending another singer -- an Italian tenor named Vittorio Grigolo who is alleged to have groped a chorus member onstage during a Royal Opera tour of Japan. And the Royal Opera immediately suspended Mr. Grigolo. And the Met in its memo saying that it was withdrawing Mr. Domingo also noted that Mr. Grigolo will not be appearing in scheduled performances. So we have a very famous and very infuential artist -- and it took them well over a month to reach this decision. And in the case of another talented artist but someone who is much less of a household name it was an almost instantaneous decision.

CO: We're going to leave it there. Thank you for your reporting and for speaking with us Anastasia.

AT: I appreciate it Carol. Thanks for having me.

AH: Anastasia Tsioulcas is a music reporter for NPR. We reached her in New York City.

[Music]

Best Restroom

AH: Gas station bathrooms can be...questionable. And the questions can include "what happened in here?" But the Beaver Hill Shell gas station in Lac la Biche, Alberta does not count itself among those terrifying toilets. The bathrooms there are so nice they were nominated for the award for Canada's Best Restroom. And today the toilets in there are truly thrones -- for those bathrooms have been crowned champion. As It Happens guest host Piya Chattopadhyay spoke with Mo Kabalan, the owner of the Beaver Hill Shell in August after he was nominated. And here he is describing his washroom from our archives.

SOUNDCLIP

MO KABALAN: They're pretty clean and fancy. They've got tiles from floor to the ceiling. They got granite sinks. We've got handmade wooden stalls on the doors for the toilets. And we have chandeliers from the ceiling.

PC: You have chandeliers in your gas station bathroom?

MK: Yeah. [PC and MO laugh]

PC: I guess you know the most important question is why? Why do this at your gas station washroom?

MK: Why not? I don’t know just that’s somewhere for the people to stop so they don't skip us. And then the same thing like I told other people, like my wife kind -- we used to live in Fort McMurray, and it was a long drive to Edmonton, and we wouldn't stop anywhere till we got home. So that was a painful five-hour drive. [laughs]

PC: You wouldn't stop to go to the washroom on that long drive?

MK: No, she’d rather go on the side of the road than some of the washrooms that’s out there. [laughs]

PC: And so when people stop by your washroom, most people I think just perhaps kind of go. And they stop you know the next gas station on the road. They don't plan to stop at a specific gas station. So when they stop at yours, and they see chandeliers, and granite counters, and wooden doors, what kind of comments do they say to you?

MK: Well, I've seen people run out and get the people in their vehicle to come out a look at the bathroom. They’re like this is nicer than my house. And a couple guys commented, saying oh, you should have a soaker tub in there. [laughs]

AH: That's Mo Kabalan, the owner of the Beaver Hill Shell, on As It Happens in August after his gas stations facilities made the shortlist for Canada's Best Restroom. Yesterday those washrooms won that award.

[Music]

Raoul Wallenberg trip

Guest: Louis von Dardel

AH: Raoul Wallenberg's efforts to save Jews in Budapest during World War Two are world-famous. He's been credited with saving thousands of lives. But even now his family says there are a lot of questions about how and when the Swedish businessman and diplomat died. Family members traveled to Sweden to try to find answers and today they met with government officials in Stockholm. Louis von Dardel is Raoul Wallenberg's niece. And we reached her in Stockholm.

CO: Ms. von Dardel what do you want the Swedish government to do to help you find out what happened to your uncle?

LOUIS VON DARDEL: So what we, the family, want is that the Swedish government or foreign ministry helps us doing pressure on Russia so that the Russians open the archive concerning Raoul Wallenberg. And in fact we have specific questions -- a few dozen questions. So we know exactly that the documents do exist in Russia and where they are in which kind of archives. And so we want to see these specific documents in order to advance and understand what happened to Raoul.

CO: You met with government officials in Stockholm today. What did you find out? Where they helpful?

LOUIS VON DARDEL: To start with what they proposed was that they would support the family by translating our questions into Russian. In fact we don't need this kind of help because we have already the Russian version of our questions. But what we need is an official support and official wanting to know what happened to one of our diplomats.

CO: They recently -- the Swedish government recently -- released about 40,000 new documents. But as you have pointed out they didn't do that voluntarily. They did that after a lot of lobbying on the part of your family to get answers. Why is Sweden so reluctant to help you find out what happened Raoul Wallenberg?

LOUIS VON DARDEL: In fact I don't know why. We have wondered all our lives, why they were so reluctant. Sometimes I wonder after so many years if they know themselves why they are reluctant. But anyway I know they open most of their archives. There are still about 200 documents or pages that are in secrecy. But we hope that soon they can open these two. But anyway we want answers to our questions and we also have questions to the Swedes. But for the moment what we really want is the support or the standing up of the Swedish government towards Russia.

CO: What do you actually know? What is actually known at this point about what happened to Mr. Wallenberg after he was arrested by the Soviets? What can we actually say we know happened?

LOUIS VON DARDEL: So what we really know was that he was imprisoned. We don't really know why. But he was imprisoned in Moscow in 1945. And then there is a bit of a mystery because there are testimonies of various people but they have never been followed up by the Swedish government. So we don't really know how valid they are. And now we know about the prisoner in the cell number seven. So this is one of the biggest deal because we know that he was interrogated in July which means after the death -- one of the death versions where Raoul would have died of a heart attack. So we need really to know about this Prisoner Number 7 because at that time important prisoners were numbered and not named into archives. So we need to have the name and very probably it is Raoul Wallenberg. So that would make us advance because then we will need to know what happened to Raoul after. Because then he was still alive in July 1947.

CO: Because the official Soviet account was that Raoul Wallenberg died of a heart attack in 1947 in that prison. But you're mentioning this Prisoner Number 7. This unidentified person. What is his identity? What would that tell you that would contradict the Soviet account of how your uncle died?

LOUIS VON DARDEL: Because if the Prisoner Number 7 was interrogated that means -- and if it is Raoul Wallenberg that means that he was alive. And now then the next question will be what happened to him afterwards. So it makes a big change because maybe he survived many years and that would have been quite horrible to know that he survived so many years without being brought back home.

CO: As you know your uncle is revered. He is talked about and celebrated as someone who saved the lives of so many Jews. And he is a hero for so many people around the world. And the Swedes celebrate him too. So is there any way to get the Swedes to help you more given the fact that Sweden has so much respect for Raoul Wallenberg?

LOUIS VON DARDEL: So in fact what is making things move right now is the press. The fact that what we are doing is coming out in the newspapers and that is what makes people -- archives or politicians to move wanting to do something. So in fact the press has a huge role in this matter.

CO: You have said elsewhere your family has said that you will not rest until you get answers. Do you think you will finally get answers?

LOUIS VON DARDEL: Yes I think so because we have been going on for so many years and maybe one of the reasons for solving the problem is that the setup of having to deal with us constantly. And in fact the archives concerning my uncle, they are the biggest ones of the Swedish Foreign Ministry. So it is a huge fight.

CO: Ms. von Dardel I hope you get your answers and I appreciate you speaking to us. Thank you.

LOUIS VON DARDEL: Thank you so much for calling.

AH: Louis von Dardel is the niece of Raoul Wallenberg. And she was in Stockholm.

[Music]

Slow Violence

AH: "Slow Violence" is a perfect title. There are twists and turns of trauma -- rarely obvious or abrupt -- and the story plays out over the course of generations. Today that remarkable story by Victoria, B.C., writer Jenny Boychuck was announced as the winner of the 2019 CBC Nonfiction Prize. The jury said Ms. Boychuck's story celebrates the healing power of mercy. And in their citation they wrote quote, "As is almost always the case, the perpetrator is a victim -- and his victim, also a perpetrator. This is a beautifully written story of grace. It is a story we all need." Here's Jenny Boychuck reading part of Slow Violence.

SOUNDCLIP

JENNY BOYCHUCK: My mother worked as a registered nurse for most of my childhood. When a neighbour's mother was in the hospital, dying of cancer, my mother stayed with her for days, sleeping at her bedside, ensuring she was comfortable. She stayed at her side until the woman finally passed away. Four years later, while we were on a camping trip, my mother jumped out of the car to aid an elderly woman who'd just been hit by a car right in front of us. After the paramedics arrived, my mother returned to us covered in blood and my father got out of the car with a roll of toilet paper to help wipe the blood off her hands. She poked her head through the passenger seat window, forced her lips into a smile, and asked my brother and I if we were all right. Then she told us not to look at her.

So many nights my mother came through the backdoor in our kitchen, her scrubs stained with blood and other bodily fluids, and told me not to hug her. So many nights someone called the house or brought their son or daughter to the front door, asking for medical advice.

"What do you think this rash is? "

"Her fever has spiked."

"He's having chest pain — should I give him some aspirin?"

My grandparents visited once or twice a year.

Each morning, as I shuffled into the kitchen, my grandfather would set down his coffee cup and sing, "Here she comes! Miss America!" He was kind to me. He asked questions about school, encouraged me and always brought me a new novel with a sweet, handwritten note inside.

Somehow, this was the same man who, one night, watched his then 15-year-old daughter kiss a boy in the alley behind their house. My mother was past her curfew. My grandfather waited for her to come through the backdoor, then punched her in the face with such force that it knocked her to her knees.

At 15, I said goodbye to my mother as she left for rehab. I thought addiction was a temporary affliction. I thought she was wrong — no, I knew she was wrong. I thought she would come home in a few months, in June when the flower boxes my father and I planted in her absence would be in full bloom and she would be herself again. My mother, as I knew her, was a fierce, intelligent woman who took care of everything and everyone. Order bowed at her feet. I couldn't yet see the thick ropes of trauma and PTSD knotting her to her memories. I didn't know that she never felt safe, and I couldn't comprehend chronic back pain so severe that even a bottle of Tylenol per day and vials of morphine stolen from the hospital couldn't offer relief.

A week after my mother returned home, my grandmother died of cancer. It was late May, and she'd received the diagnosis of non-Hodgkin lymphoma only weeks prior. When my father told my mother about the diagnosis, she decided to leave rehab early.

It was at my grandmother's funeral, nestled in black between my mother and aunt, my neck laced with the sharp scent of vodka on my mother's breath, that I learned the word "relapse."

Over the next decade, my mother turned to opiates, benzos, cocaine, alcohol, marijuana, methadone and whatever else she could find to temporarily soothe what no longer agreed to stay hidden inside of her. She got clean, then relapsed. My parents spilt up, then got back together. In the mornings, my mother was herself, smiling with a cup of coffee as she flipped through TV channels. But by the time evening arrived, she'd be microwaving mint chocolate chip ice cream or passing out in bed with a cigarette lit in her mouth.

Sometimes, if she drank vodka, she'd work herself into such a rage that she would chase me or my father out of the house. One afternoon, as I pulled out of the driveway, she tried to hang on to my car window and dislocated her shoulder. She broke my heart the way only a mother can. The way only an addict can.

Our neighbour, Lisa, brought lemon squares to my mother's funeral. She was in remission from breast cancer, but chemotherapy had hollowed out her bones, and she was recovering from one hip replacement while awaiting another.

Nevertheless, Lisa brewed pots of coffee for the guests and instructed her husband where to place the chairs. She plated baked goods and arranged bouquets of pink, red, and yellow Gerber daisies trimmed from her garden. "In case you and your father didn't think to bring flowers," she said. I had met her husband several times, but I'd never met Lisa. She shifted her weight over to one crutch and reached out to hug me.

"I didn't meet your mother many times," she said, "But what I remember is her smile. She was always smiling."

After the funeral, a friend brought me one of Lisa's lemon squares on a napkin. It tasted so unexpectedly bright, so sour and sweet and alive that I immediately began to cry.

AH: Victoria, B.C. writer Jenny Boychuck is the winner of the 2019 CBC Nonfiction Prize -- and that was an excerpt from her winning submission "Slow Violence." As the winner, Ms. Boychuck will receive 6,000 dollars from the Canada Council for the Arts, and a two week writing residency at the Banff Centre for Arts and Creativity. And to hear her read her whole story or to read it yourself visit: cbcbooks.ca

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

September 25, 2019 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode