Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2018

The AIH Transcript for November 14, 2018

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

CAROL OFF: Hello, I’m Carol Off.

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

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

JD: Tonight:

CO: Irreconcilable differences. British Prime Minister Theresa May's draft EU divorce deal gets cabinet approval, but one pro-Brexit MP says all the concessions to the EU give him a splitting headache.

JD: He hasn't heard from her since a fire destroyed her home. Now, Sol Bechtold is searching shelters and circulating flyers in northern California, desperately hoping to find his 75-year-old mother.

CO: Taking one from the team. At least, that's how McGill alumnus Michael Nelson feels: he's urging the university not to change the name of its teams from the "Redmen" — because he doesn't think it's racist.

JD: Justice of the pizza. After lodging a complaint about making less than minimum wage, an Ontario delivery driver wins his case — and he's hoping that decision starts a Dominos effect.

CO: Letting pie-gones be pie-gones. A year after his public dismissal of pineapple on pizza created an international incident, Iceland's president explains why he got so crusty.

JD: And...prepared with TLC — not THC. They thought the name of their business was straightforward -- but since legalization, a Montreal couple has been inundated with calls from people confused about why their store's called "The Flower Pot".

JD: "As It Happens", the Wednesday edition. Radio that hopes they can nip it without the bud.

[Music: Theme]

Part one: Brexit: latest, delivery worker wins ruling, #AIH50: Iceland President pizza follow-up

Brexit: latest

Guest: Bill Cash

JD: British Prime Minister Theresa May has managed to dodge a Conservative Party revolt over her Brexit deal — for now. This afternoon, she convinced her cabinet to approve a draft deal for the UK to leave the EU. Here's part of what Ms. May had to say outside 10 Downing Street — with the occasional yelling of protestors in the background.

[sc]

THERESA MAY: The choice was this deal, which enables us to take back control and to build a brighter future for our country —or going back to square one, with more division and more uncertainty, and a failure to deliver on the referendum. I believe that what I owe to this country is to take decisions that are in the national interest. And I firmly believe with my head and my heart that this is a decision which is in the best interests of our entire United Kingdom.

[/sc]

JD: But while the British PM managed to convince her cabinet to move forward with her Brexit deal, she's left many other Conservative MPs deeply dissatisfied — and vowing to vote the plan down when it comes up in Parliament. Many hard-core Brexiters feel that Ms. May gave up too much in her negotiations with Europe. Most significantly, the PM agreed to a temporary customs union with the EU, to avoid the creation of a hard border between Northern Ireland and The Republic, which remains the the union. Many are concerned that under that customs agreement, EU laws would still be applied in the UK. Bill Cash is a Conservative MP and a long time Brexit advocate. We reached him earlier today in London.

CO: Mr. Cash, are you at all confident that Theresa May has in hand a Brexit deal that you'll be able to accept?

BILL CASH: No, I'm not. I've been in Parliament now 34 years. I've seen a lot of crises in that period of time. And this is a situation which is of a historic nature. So constitutional crises have a very practical impact on people — and leaving the European Union, which is what the British people did by a historic vote, the biggest vote ever, Seventeen-point-four-million people is a historic watershed. Just as going in was in 1972.

CO: I just want to point out to people who can hear your TV on in the background, you have it on not because you are wanting to watch TV, but because this is earlier in the day we’re speaking to you, and you are waiting to find out what comes out of this crucial cabinet meeting. What do you need to hear out of that? What are you waiting to hear?

BC: Well, we want to know whether the cabinet has agreed this draft agreement that’s been apparently proposed and not yet concluded. Because she may have agreed to it, but the question is will the Cabinet agree to it? And then beyond that, will Parliament agree to it. So for practical purposes it's a massive issue. If you’re leaving the European Union, and I sincerely trust we will, I led the Maastricht referendum campaign back in 1993 because I felt very strongly that we did not want European government any more than I suspect Canada would want to be governed by America if I can put it that way around. It might put things in focus for some of you.

CO: From what you're hearing, what is it that concerns you the most about what might be in this deal?

BC: What concerns me most? It's our democracy. It’s control over our laws. We've been governed by a majority vote over the last 40 odd years from the European Union. We agreed to do that back in 1972, but actually, it hasn't worked. I mean I've said this over and over again in the House of Commons as well. I mean the fact is that if you're being affected in the future having laws imposed upon you by 27 other countries by majority vote when you're not even at the table, and by the way, you may be amazed to hear, there isn't even the transcripts of the proceedings available when the Council of Ministers of the European Union makes these decisions. So unlike Westminster or Canada, both of which of course I’m familiar with, or the United States, where you have transcripts. You know what people have said; you know which way they voted. I mean none of this will apply. I mean it's an amazing state of affairs which people actually don't necessarily appreciate.

CO: But now isn't the case that Theresa May is trying to convince you and others that this is the best you can do? And if she's able to convince enough people that as awful as this might appear to be, there's no other way of doing it, and being able to keep the support that she's got in her minority government — and to satisfy the concerns of people in Ireland. If she can convince them this is the best they can do, is she going to get the support?

BC: This is not about compromise. This is about capitulation. We left lawfully. The way the EU is carrying on, anyone would think that they're the only ones who should lay down the guidelines and lay down the terms of reference for the negotiations. The reality is that we are in a very strong position ourselves. The EU sells far more to us than we do to them.

CO Can I just ask you do you think Theresa May should resign?

BC: I think that there are a lot of people who are thinking let's wait and see. Let's wait and see what the agreement actually does do. I have not seen it. I have a very good idea of the trajectory. I know that the Northern Ireland MPs are very, very unhappy indeed this evening. And they're demanding to see Theresa May this evening. But the reality is that we leave the European Union lawfully, having held a referendum, having passed the requisite acts of Parliament on the 31st of March 2019. Then we are unshackled from the European treaties. But, unfortunately, there is an arrangement that she's entered into and we know that this is part of the agreement that's being discussed whereby we will be effectively governed by the European Union in many areas of law, without our even being there at the table. I mean this is so inconceivable. I'm sure people in Canada would be absolutely amazed to hear this.

CO: Okay, inconceivable. But at some point, Mr. Cash, can you see yourself holding your nose and voting for it?

BC: No, not this agreement. No. And what I know and as a chairman of this committee I'm in pretty good place to understand that we had a European Scrutiny Committee meeting this afternoon discussing the parameters of all this. Basically, the fundamental principle, which I raised to the prime minister last week in the House of Commons on the floor of the house, I said how can you possibly claim, which you did originally, that we will control our own laws? When, in fact, the laws will be made in their Council of Ministers that the other 27 member states imposed on us. That is the sort of thing that's so incredible for people to absorb. But that is what is happening.

CO: We will be following this very closely, Mr. Cash. And I appreciate you speaking with us tonight. Thank you.

BC: And could I just say we do want good relations with other countries, but this is not the way to go about as.

CO: We hear you. Thank you, sir.

BC: Okay, thank you.

CO: Bye.

BC: Bye bye.

JD: Bill Cash is a British Conservative MP. We reached him in London. Now that the draft Brexit plan has been approved by cabinet, the ball moves back to the EU's court. An emergency EU summit will be held later this month to sign off on the proposal. After that, it will face its biggest challenge — in the UK parliament, where many MP's have already said they'll vote against it.

[Music: Jazz]

Delivery worker wins ruling

Guest: Juan Jose Lira Cervantes

JD: If you've ordered pizza recently, for delivery, chances are the person who delivered that pie wasn't making a living wage. Juan Jose Lira Cervantes knows that life well. For four years, he was a delivery driver for Dominos Pizza, working seven days a week, and making a lot less than minimum wage. He was acting as the sole breadwinner, and raising six children — and he was barely making ends meet. So he submitted a complaint to Ontario's Ministry of Labour, against Dominos. And today, he won — to the tune of 28-thousand dollars in lost wages and benefits. We reached Mr. Cervantes in Mississauga.

CO: Juan, first of all, congratulations.

JAUN JOSE LIRA CERVANTES: Thank you, Carol.

CO: What will this mean to you? Twenty-eight-thousand dollars of this payment, what does that mean for your family?

JJLC: Well, it means that you know now we don't have to if the saving on things that we had to do before because you know we were earning so little. Not buying clothes — you know most of the clothes that we have are donated by friends. We were also not buying furniture, going through the food banks, and I think that with this we can let people who need the food banks more than us now you know to go and get the help.

CO: You're raising six kids, right? And you were working at Domino's starting in 2013. How much were you making per hour when you began?

JJLC: When I started, I started at six dollars an hour. Then, gradually went up to 6.50, seven dollars, and last January to eight dollars an hour.

CO: At that time, 2013, the minimum wage in Ontario was ten dollars and 25 cents, so how is it that you were making six dollars an hour? How is Domino's Pizza able to get away with that?

JJLC: My understanding was that that type of wage was generally paid to drivers all throughout. So whether it was Domino's Pizza, Pizza Nova or Pizza Pizza, they pay their drivers much less than minimum wage.

CO: So they don't call you employees, right? Even though you're driving, you’re delivering their pizza, they say that you're independent contractors, and so they don't need to pay you the same amount. You're freelance. So is that how they were able to get away with paying you six dollars an hour?

JJLC: Yeah, because all drivers have to sign a paper whether they say that they're independent contractors, and they will only be paid whatever seven or eight dollars an hour.

CO: You have to pay for all the repairs on your car as well — the upkeep and the maintenance, right?

JJLC: Yeah.

CO: Does it seem like you just break even sometimes?

JJLC: I know it’s a dead-end job. And I've gone through four different cars., so one car a year really working at Domino's. And I think the situation with most delivery drivers is about the same. Yeah, it's a big expense.

CO: How did you manage with six kids? How are you raising your family, taking care of them on that kind of a wage?

JJLC: I think I became very good at saving every penny. I know that my wife didn't like it because when we did groceries, our budget was just forty dollars. If you wanted to buy something, I said well go to the donation centre, ask your friends, we will go out on the streets pick up furniture or whatever that was on the street. Somebody else's garbage was our fortune, so we made use of quite a lot of that as well.

CO: You decided earlier this year you were going to talk to your manager about your wages. This is when you heard that minimum wage was going up in Ontario to fourteen dollars. And so you went to see your manager, and said hey, what's up? How did he respond when you asked him about this minimum wage?

JJLC: He said he didn't know anything about it, and I thought to myself well, how come I know about it? So that didn't seem right. And then I told if you don't know about it I'm going to inquire to the Minister of Labour, which he immediately said no, Juan, don't do that. Let me ask my lawyers and head office about it. And he called me 15 minutes later, and he told me that no, there was no such an increase — and that you know my pay was the same. And since I knew that was not right, I decided to go ahead and file my claim.

CO: At what point did he fire you?

JJLC: I think it was one week or two weeks later. I got a call by the manager, how told me Hi Juan, we don’t have a schedule for you this week. And I said are you firing me? And he said yeah, I guess so.

CO: Wow. And so you're already pinching every penny you had. How did you manage after you lost your job?

JJLC: Coincidentally, that same day was the day of when my wife was hired at Value Village. So there was a shift in our responsibilities. I would stay at home to take care of the kids while she will go to work. And she has a full-time job at Value Village now.

CO: At minimum wage?

JJLC: Yeah, yeah, at minimum wage, yes, the regular 14 dollars an hour.

CO: You say that now you got this payment — 28-thousand dollars — but nothing's changing, right? It's possible that these companies it's easier for them to just pay off people like yourself when it comes up, and continue to pay them six dollars or seven dollars an hour. There's still a way ahead, aren't they? I mean would it take to change it so that delivery people like yourself would be paid at least minimum wage?

JJLC: I think either the Ministry of Labour taking proactive action, and getting all the big companies in a meeting and trying to reform this situation. Or perhaps what is happening in the U.S. right now, which is a class-action lawsuit on behalf of 400,000 drivers against Dominos. Perhaps that’s the way. But I would prefer the Dominos and other companies do the right thing, obey the law, and consider their drivers as employees and not as independent contractors. I think it will be less of a liability for them in the long run.

CO: Just finally Juan, what's the first thing you're going to go out and buy?

JJLC: A bed for my daughter. My daughter sleeps on the floor, so she needs a bed and a mattress, and that’s the first thing I’m going to do.

CO: That sounds like a good place to start. Juan, it's good to talk to you, and again, congratulations. Thank you.

JJLC: Thank you for your call.

CO: Bye.

JJLC: Okay. Bye bye.

JD: Juan Jose Lira Cervantes is a former pizza delivery driver for Dominos Pizza. That company was just ordered by Ontario's Ministry of Labour to pay Mr. Cervantes 28-thousand dollars in lost wages and benefits. In a statement to CBC, Dominos said, quote, "Our franchisee will fully comply with the ruling. There are no plans to appeal."

[Music: Guitar]

#AIH50: Iceland President pizza follow-up

Guest: Guðni Jóhannesson

JD: Perhaps he believed he was making an innocent joke that the world would ignore. After all, the Icelandic presidency is a mostly ceremonial position. But last year, when Guðni Jóhannesson proclaimed he was, quote, "fundamentally opposed" to pineapple on pizza — and that he'd even like to see it banned — the president of Iceland set off a fiery debate amongst "As It Happens" listeners. That debate led us to the Canadian man who claimed to have invented pineapple-on-pizza: Sam Panopolous. Here's Sam describing his early pineapple pies.

[sc]

SAM PANOPOLOUS: Then, I tried to make some pizza. And then along the way, threw some pineapples on it. And nobody like it at first, you know? But after that, they went crazy about it. Because those days, nobody was mixing sweets and sours and all this — it was just plain food

[/sc]

JD: Sadly, Sam died in June of 2017. And at that time, President Jóhannesson put aside his pineapple position, and offered his condolences to Mr. Panopoulos’s friends and family. And as we approach our fiftieth anniversary, we thought now was a good time to call up President Jóhannesson, and get to the bottom of his polarizing pizza opinion. We reached the president in Reykjavik.

CO: President Jóhannesson, I'm going to get right to the point here. What is your problem with pineapple on pizza?

GUONI JOHANNESSON: Well, I was asked a question, and I had to give an honest answer. I have nothing against pineapples. But when they're put on a pizza, they get all sort of mushy. And I have five children, and I've been with them on school trips and so on and so forth, and the undeniable fact is that more often than not when you have Hawaiian pizza, the pineapples are taken off and left whereas the rest of the pizza is consumed. So I had to reply in all honesty when I was asked about this debatable issue that I actually didn't like pineapple on pizza.

CO: Okay, but you went one step further, didn't you? You didn't just tell your children take the pineapple off. Sure, good enough, you don't like it. You wanted to ban pineapple on pizza. That's how far you went.

GJ: Yes, that's where you know the influence of this office sort of got the better of me. I went a step too far. I admit that now. And as it happened, I had to issue a clarification after I had voiced my opinion in college up in the northern part of Iceland the following day. This was front page news. So yes, I had to think it through and calm these stormy waters. And I issued a presidential statement on pineapples on pizza. It went like this: I like pineapples, just not on pizza. I do not have the power to make laws which forbid people to put pineapple on their pizza. I am glad that I do not hold such power. Presidents should not have unlimited power. I would not want to hold this position if I could pass laws forbidding that which I don't like. For pizzas, I recommend seafood. So this was my statement, and I stand by that. As much as I do not like pineapple on pizza, the individual freedom of having the topping of your choice overrides that.

CO: Okay, but you're trying to be presidential and be diplomatic. You call it a clarification. Sir, we call it a flip-flop. I mean, in political terms, you were on one side; you were going to ban pineapple on pizza. And then you’re on the other side. So I'm sorry, but that's how it got played.

GJ: Yeah, I know. And I mean I remember also in this uproar that was created that your own very own Justin Trudeau issued a statement as well on Twitter. I have a pineapple, I have a pizza, and I stand behind this delicious Southwestern Ontario creation. So I mean yes, I will fully admit that I had to revise my position on this matter. But I actually think that when you think closely about it, you should be able to say yeah, I may have gone too far, I am backtracking, I am not trying to ban that which I don't like. You know I think politicians in general should be allowed to not flip-flop, but revise and change their minds. You know, what's wrong with changing your mind?

CO: Well, you know Sam Panopolous, who was the inventor of pineapple on pizza, this is the southwestern Ontario creation that the Prime Minister spoke of, he came on our show to talk about this and about you and what you had said. And we just want to play a clip. This is Sam Panopolous, talking about your attempt to ban pineapple pizza.

[sc]

SP: I mean I don’t know the guy. The guy should know better because I'm sure he's a lot younger than I am. And I was doing pizza when I was young guy, you know what I mean? He tried to push his fish you know on the pizza because he's making a lot of fish there.

[/sc]

CO: OK. And you know, of course, shortly after that, Sam Panopolous passed away. You sent your condolences to the family and friends of Sam Panopolous, didn't you?

GJ: Yes, I most certainly did. And I understood and appreciated his point of view. And blessed be his memory. And this was this was so interesting. This was a distraction from the more serious, if I may say so, aspects of my office and world politics in general. And I think the Sam Panopolous you know correctly guessed what was behind all this. We Icelanders are a nation of Fisher-folk, and you know if everyone put seafood on their pizzas that would be a very nice thing to do.

CO: OK, wait a second here, are you admitting that there was a hidden agenda in this? Are you in the pocket of “Big Fish”, Mr. President?

GJ: No, I wouldn't go that far. But, in all honesty, seafood on pizza is good. You should try it.

CO: I have. I think that somebody has actually tried to put seafood and pineapple on pizza.

GJ: Well, that combination I'm not sure, but just to put the record straight, I would not ban it. But let me also add that in the furor afterwards, I got many messages of support from, in particular, Italians.

CO: OK. But I just want to say one thing about your reliability. I mean because really Iceland, this is the home of fermented shark, sour ram’s testicle, you make a drink — a schnapps — out of fermented potatoes and caraway, you smoke your meat with dried sheep's dung. Why should anyone trust your view on what should be on any food, let alone pizza?

GJ: Now that you put it that way, I'm a bit at a loss for words now. I think you should approach Icelandic cuisine with an open mind — a very, very open mind.

CO: Do you eat fermented shark?

GJ: I most certainly do, yes. Who wouldn't? I don't put it on my pizza though.

CO: President Jóhannesson, it's been delightful speaking with you and thank you for us for coming on the show.

GJ: My pleasure and you know just remember what I said about seafood.

CO: All right. We will, “Big Fish”. Bye.

GJ: All right. Take care. Bye bye.

JD: Guðni Jóhannesson is the President of Iceland. We reached him in Reykjavik. And this coming Friday, we'll deliver a piping hot radio special to celebrate fifty years of "As It Happens", right directly to your ears. Order a pizza for your listening party. Pineapple optional.

[Music: Electronica]

Part two: California wildfires: search, “Flower Pot” couple

California wildfires: search

Guest: Sol Bechtold

JD: Sol Bechtold hasn't heard from his mother. Her name is Joanne Caddy. She's 75 years old. And she's from Magalia in northern California. Last week, her neighbourhood was hit by wildfire. And Mr. Bechtold says he has learned that his mom's house burned down. The Camp Fire is now the single deadliest blaze in California’s history: at least 48 people have lost their lives. It destroyed much of the town of Paradise. And today, officials have continued searching the area to for remains. Many people are still missing, leaving families desperately awaiting news. We reached Sol Bechtold in Pleasanton, California, earlier today.

CO: Sol, how are you holding up?

SOL BECHTOLD: I'm doing OK, you know? With my mother missing, it's day-by-day. And as long as I'm staying focused on trying to find her and keep her story out there, I'm doing OK.

CO: I understand you and your mom would have a chat on the phone every weekend, and you had your last conversation just the weekend before the fire. Was there any indication that there was trouble coming?

SB: We do talk every weekend. No indication that there was any trouble coming. You know, had a really good conversation like we always do.

CO: How much are you thinking about that conversation now?

SB: Thinking about it a lot. We talked about you know Thanksgiving coming up, and what are we doing? And then also you know making plans. She always comes for Christmas you know so I go up and get her and bring her down. She doesn't drive, so I usually go up and get her, and she comes and stays with us for Christmas. So we started to make plans for Christmas. So thinking a lot about you know the holidays and don't know what's going to happen between now and then.

CO: So take us back to last week. At what point did you start to worry about your mom?

SB: Thursday after I left work, you know got home and saw the news and the fire. And as soon as they said Paradise, you know a little bit of panic came over me. I hopped on the phone and tried to call her. The phone lines didn't go through. I tried to call you know her neighbours. Nothing was going through. You know, called the police and they were inundated, and you know phone lines were busy. Nothing was kind of going through, so you couldn't really get any information other than what was on the TV.

CO: Was this going on while you knew that there were evacuation orders or that people were leaving Paradise?

SB: On the television, on the news local news, they just said that there was a fire, that there were some evacuations for paradise. There wasn't a lot said about the town my mother lives in, which is just the next town north of Paradise.

CO: Did she live alone?

SB: She did. She did.

CO: Are you thinking that also you might have to prepare for the worst?

SB: I am. I am. I've thought about it a lot and you know there is that possibility that she may not be here anymore. And it's really hard to think about that, right? But it's reality, and got to persevere through this. And until I get some closure, I'm going to think that she's out there. And I'm going to continue to search for her.

CO: Your mom's name is Joanne Caddy?

SB: Correct.

CO: Well, if people know where Joanne Caddy is, they should get in touch with you.

SB: Yes. Thank you. I appreciate that.

CO: Sol, I really hope you find her.

SB: Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

CO: Thank you so much for talking to us. Bye.

SB: All right. Thank you. Bye.

JD: Sol Bechtold is a California resident who is hoping to hear from his mother. We reached him in Pleasanton, California, earlier today.

[Music: Ambient]

Gillers: Thea Lim

JD: In Thea Lim's novel "An Ocean of Minutes", time travel is many things. It's a metaphor for immigration, the harbinger of a whole lot of heartbreak, and a way of asking why we bother to fall in love — when we know, eventually, everything ends. Ms. Lim's book is shortlisted for the 2018 Scotiabank Giller Prize. The winner of which will be announced on November 19th. And in anticipation, and leading up to that announcement, we're airing readings by all five nominated authors, including this excerpt from "An Ocean of Minutes" read by author, Thea Lim, at Calgary's Bella Concert Hall last month.

[sc]

THEA LIM: The news outlets went down weeks ago, but that didn't stop the blitz of ads for the rebuild America time travel initiative. Billboards painted on buildings, posters wheat-pasted over empty storefronts, and used mailboxes stuffed with mailers. There is no flu in 2002, and travel to the future and rebuild America, and no skills necessary; training provided. At first, the ads were like a joke — gallows humour for people who were stranded once the credit companies went down, and the state borders were closed to stop the flu's spread. People like Polly and Frank, who got trapped in Texas by accident. Later, the ads made Frank angry. He would tear the pamphlets from the mailboxes, muttering about opportunism. You know they don't market this to the rich, he'd say and. And then an hour later, he'd say it again. They stayed indoors except for the one day a week when they traveled to the grocery store, which had been commandeered by five Army reservists, who doled out freeze-dried goods to ragged shoppers. One day, the glass doors were locked. A handwritten signs set to go around the back.

TL: The soldiers were having a party. With their rifles still strapped on, they were handing out canned cocktail wieners — one per person — on little desert plates that looked forlorn in their huge hands. Ted, the youngest, a boy from Kansas, who had already lost his hair, was leaving for a job in the future. He was going to be an independent energy contractor. There was another sign bigger and in the same writing on the back wall: 2000, here we come. Frank was usually the life of the party, but that afternoon behind the grocery store, he picked on a pinch-faced woman muttering at her why don't they stop the pandemic then if they can time travel? Why don’t they travel back in time to patient zero and stop him from coughing on patient one? They tried. The woman spoke with her mouth full. The earliest attainable destination is June of 81 — seven months too late. What? Why? How can that be? This clumsy show of anger was new. Frank was normally charming. Later, his sudden social frailty would seem like a warning of the sickness that arrived next. It unsettled Polly, and she was slow to react. But the woman didn't need someone to intervene. That's the limit of the technology she said. It took until the end of 93 to perfect the machine, and twelve years is the farthest it can jump. Or to be precise, four thousand one hundred and ninety eight days is the farthest it can jump. Do you live under a rock? The tips of Frank's ears pinked. And Polly should have made a joke, offered comfort. But she was distracted. In that second stop being a fiction. Time travel existed, and the plates of her reality were shifting. She felt a greasy dread in the centre of her chest. She wanted to drop her food and take Frank's hand and anchor him in the crook of her arm as if he were in danger of being blown away. Now, they are pulling up to the lone bus stop, and they can see the new time travel facility across the lot bisected by trolleys. The facility is a monolith — the widest, tallest building either of them has ever seen, and something primal in Polly quails. The only thing remaining of familiar airport protocol is the logistical thoughtlessness of the curb. Once you reach it, the line of unfeeling motorists waiting behind you means only seconds to say goodbye.

[/sc]

JD: That was Thea Lim, reading an excerpt from her novel "An Ocean of Minutes". That is one of five books nominated for this year's Scotiabank Giller Prize. The winner will be announced November 19th on CBC Television, and CBC Radio One.

[Music: Ambient]

“Flower Pot” couple

Guest: Pia Teichmann

JD: The Flower Pot is exactly what you would think it is — a place to buy flowers. Named for the thing you put flowers in. It’s simple enough. Pia Teichmann and her husband, Herbert, certainly thought it was when they named it that. They're the owners and operators of "The Flower Pot". But over the last month they've had some confused customers. Customers who've been mistakenly focused on the second noun in that seemingly straightforward name: "pot". We reached Pia Teichmann in Montreal.

CO: Pia, can you tell us what people have been asking for when they call The Flower Pot?

PIA TEICHMANN: Some of the people ask if we carry pot, or cannabis, or some even say marry-ju-wana.

CO: Marry-ju-wana?

PT: Marry-ju-wana. I have a Frenchman who called to us three times, and he always said marry-ju-wana.

CO: So what did you do when people started calling and asking you for marijuana?

PT: In the beginning, we didn't know how to handle it because we had no idea why they called the Flower Pot. But now we know. You have the wrong place. We’re florists. You’ll have to phone somebody else for it.

CO: So they thought because your shop is called The Flower Pot that you are selling pot?

PT: Yeah, and I guess it’s because we have “pot” in our name. And if people go in and search for pot, maybe that's why we came up? But I put in where do I find weed because that’s what one customer told me. He said he put in where do I buy weed, and it showed up also.

CO: It came up in this search when he when he put it into Google asking where do I buy weed in Montreal. And your shop came up?

PT: Or close by and things like that and it would come up.

CO: Well, how did you react when people started calling you up for dope?

PT: We didn't know how to handle it. We said no, you have the wrong place. We are florists, and we don’t carry that. But we also had one woman asking us in French how long is the lineup? What lineup? How many people are waiting right now at your store? I said why? She said I’m looking for some oil. I said OK, I know you have the wrong place. We’re florists; we don’t carry that.

CO: And now, there are big lineups in Montreal at the places where they are selling.

PT: Absolutely.

CO: But are there big lineups at your shop?

PT: No, we don't sell pot.

CO: You sell flowers.

PT: We sell flowers, plants, balloons, chocolates, all kinds of things, but no oils or no cannabis.

CO: So now do you tell people where they can go to go buy?

PT: No, I would just say please look it up. It is government-controlled too, eh?

CO: Pia, you know there's a lot of money to be made in selling pot.

PT: That’s right. We’ve said it would be nice to make the money.

CO: Well, have you considered it? Maybe you should start growing some marijuana plants?

PT: There's actually a plant and the foliage resembles, a little bit, pot plants.

CO: Hmm.

PT: So it’s a plant that is similar, but it won’t give you what you’re looking for.

CO: It won’t make you stoned.

PT: That’s right.

CO: Now, have you ever tried?

PT: To be honest, I tried it years and years ago with a group of friends. But all it did to me, and I was really very upset, I was trying to solve a little mathematical issue and I was no able. It made it clear to me I would never try it again.

CO: But now, maybe it's different now? Maybe when you get into oils and all kinds of things, maybe there's some interesting experiences to be had?

PT: Listen, I'm sure there is. I’m sure there is, but I really don't need it. I’d rather drink a glass of wine or eat a box of chocolates if I need the pleasure.

CO: Okay, so if you're not interested in trying it, but maybe selling it. I mean is it the consideration? I mean you got fridge, you know your plants, you know how to grow them, maybe you should get into the business?

PT: Don't tempt me. We will stick with what we have.

CO: What's the hottest item for sale in your flower shop?

PT: There are periods, like for example, evidently around Valentine’s, it will be roses. But the rest of the year, it really depends what the customer is looking for. What type of flower, what type of plant they want? Sometimes it’s the colour; it’s got to be red or it’s got to be blue or whatever it is.

CO: Right. But do you think now with all the publicity you've had about your flower pot shop that maybe business will improve?

PT: No, no, many people comment. I got I don't know how many emails. As well as CTV called, And Radio Canada put it on their own French program on Tuesday morning. I didn’t even realize it.

CO: Well, it sounds like it's pretty good publicity for you?

PT: It is. I mean actually, we had one really interesting phone call. Whenever somebody phones in, we usually say have you order from us before? And she said no, but I have been driving by many times and then never stopped because there’s always a lot of traffic. But today, I read the Gazette, and I saw your name, and I knew I had to buy from you. Somebody else also said actually, I have no special reason to order flowers. But I read your article, and I think it’s about time I sent some flowers to my wife.

CO: Well, good on him. And maybe he'll come home with some oil and your flowers. Piya, it's great to talk to you. Thanks.

PT: It was. Okay. Take care. Thank you. Bye.

CO: Bye.

JD: Pia Teichmann is the co-owner of "The Flower Pot", which, I can't stress enough, sells flowers. We reached Ms. Teichmann in Montreal.

[Music: #AIH50 theme]

#AIH50: Jeff and Carol on “q”

JD: As you know by now it is the fiftieth anniversary here at “As It Happens”. And thank you to everyone who sent us the appropriate gift, which is, of course, gold. We promise not to pawn too much of it.

CO: Jeff is right. The half-century anniversary is indeed golden.

TOM POWER: Hey guys, hey, how’s it going? So sorry to interrupt, but this couldn't wait.

CO: Wait…

JD: Tom Power, host of CBC Radio's “q”? You got a lot of nerve buddy. You have a lot of nerve showing up here — in this studio — after everything you've said about my good friend and partner.

TP: I know. I know. I mean that's why I'm here. I may have gotten a bit carried away.

CO: a bit carried away?

JD: A bit?

TP: Yeah, a little bit carried away.

CO: Did you not tell people that I was part of Fleetwood Mac?

TP: I may have said you were in the new reunion of Fleetwood Mac, yes.

CO: OK. I mean this is not the only band you have said that I am part of. I mean you were you and Marc Critch from “22 Minutes”, you're talking about me and all kinds of things.

TP: Well, Mark… we played a little game called can you turn someone into a Newfoundlander. And Mark may have gotten a little bit carried away, but he said that your last name was Hoff, and he used to date Pierre Trudeau in the 70s. Is that not…

JD: Unbelievable.

CO: Really!

TP: Is that not accurate?

JD: That's not true. Right, Carol?

CO: It was later than that.

JD: The 80s!

CO: Yeah.

TP: Just to be sure I got this wrong. You don't have a tattoo that says “sexy” spelled s-e-x-s-I on your back?

CO: Do you know how many people have been texting me and asking me to see the tatt since you said that?

TP: Did I get it wrong?

JD: That's me. I have the “sexsi” tatt.

TP: I just want to beg you to come on the show, we can clear the air.

CO: Come on your show?

TP: Come on the “q” show, yeah.

CO: About what?

TP: Well, I'm thinking you might be able to come on and play some music.

CO: Fleetwood Mac?

TP: Some of the songs you've been doing in the reunion.

CO: I get to choose the music I’ll come on your show.

JD: I think you should do it.

TP: All right, so we do this thing on the show called “The Block Party” where we bring on a special guest — an extremely special guest — to play music of their home of like London, Ontario. How do feel about doing something like that?

CO: What do you think, Jeff?

JD: I think it's a good idea. I think you could take this kid to school, Carol.

CO: And then I could teach him a few things about facts.

JD: About fact checking.

CO: Okay, when is this going to happen?

TP: Tomorrow. What do you think?

CO: But no tattoo questions.

TP: Well, one.

JD: Show me.

[Music: Showtune]

Part three: McGill Redmen: alum, Rohingya repatriation, Kenyan runner

McGill Redmen: alum

Guest: Michael Nelson

JD: McGill University has a decision to make. Students and some faculty at the school are asking the administration to change the name of their men's varsity teams — the Redmen. They say it's offensive to Indigenous people. Here is Tomas Jirousek, the Indigenous student leading the effort.

[sc]

TOMAS JIROUSEK: I doesn't matter what the intent of the Redmen name is. And we aren’t even going to get into the debate around the origins of the Redmen name because what matters is that Indigenous students are telling the university that we are hurting. We are hurting here and now, and we need action to be taken. And that's the only thing the university should be prioritizing. Not in some hypothetical debate around the origins of the Redmen name that doesn't actually have an impact on the lived experience of our students.

[/sc]

JD: That’s McGill University student athlete Tomas Jirousek, speaking to CBC Montreal. Some alumni are pushing back on this. They say, as he hints at there, that the origin of the Redmen name has nothing to do with Indigenous people. Michael Nelson is a former captain of the McGill hockey team. We reached Mr. Nelson in Montreal.

CO: Mr. Nelson, what does the Redmen name mean to you?

MICHAEL NELSON: The Redman name for me signifies another family that I'm a part of. It’s a tight bond, and it's derived from the color red, which is the main color in the flag, and the colour uniforms. And that's the historical accurate portrayal of the name.

CO: And that's what the argument has been given. McGill is saying that the origin of the name was rooted in that understanding that it was the colour of the school. And also I believe some reference to some of the people who played. Is that right?

MN: Yes. So you can go through the yearbooks and the history and the references and you'll see for many, many years numerous references to colour — the red and white, the Redmen, things like that. And back in the 20s, it was a fairly common shorthand for journalists to refer to various sports teams by the colours. So you have the Toronto Varsity Blues. You've got the New Zealand All Blacks. It was about the colours of the uniforms. And the McGill Redmen were in red. That's the history of the name, and that has been the sole context of the name for almost 30 years now.

CO: We just heard from an Indigenous student at McGill, who is part of McGill's rowing team, who is then by virtue of that Redman. Who says it's hurtful to him and other Indigenous people. No matter what the origins of the name, it came to have other connotations, and they find it hurtful. What do you say to him?

MN: First of all, he's entitled to his opinion. And I fully agree that he should express his opinion — and as everybody should have the right to have an opinion. The idea that there should not be a debate and can't be discussion, I think that doesn't really go with certainly a fundamental principle of universities that you consider various viewpoints, you discuss them, debate them, research them, analyze the facts. It's surely the essential pillar of what makes a university.

CO: Well, that's what's happening here, right? There is a debate. There is a discussion. We're hearing from him. We're hearing from you. But what happens, ultimately, is that one side outweighs the other. And a decision is made. And what the opposition do have to the substance of what he is saying?

MN: So certainly, McGill has to tell its story and explain it. And I think the facts are clear out there. We've said them on the side for keeping the name as well. Certainly, for a period of time there was other connotations about the First Nations association, various teams, various marketing things. There's no doubt about that. That was used by student newspapers. So there's no arguing about that. And McGill took action about that in 1992 to change it and disassociate from any association with the name. Now, can anybody control what people think what connotation they want to apply or something? No. If you choose to apply another connotation that's up to you, you can have that opinion, it doesn't mean that it's the correct one, and it's not the determinative reason for changing. I think there's a lot of stakeholders in this. And the students, the alumni, parents of alumni, people working at the school, profs, staff, and I think McGill — I'm hopeful — that McGill wants to allow and have a full and robust discussion and debate. And I think that part of this is seen in the renaming working group that's been struck, looking at principles of commemoration and renaming. And the hot topic, of course, is the Redmen. It's not the only topic — that's just the first one. And so they're trying to figure out the principles.

CO: Right. But you point out even in your own article it's not just that some people gave some other interpretations or there was connotations casually. I mean the idea of the Indigenous association was used in a logo for the football team in the 1940s. As you point out, it was used for junior varsity teams in hockey and football in the 50s and 60s as being an Indigenous reference, and later on, the women's hockey and basketball. The references were a racist term for four Indigenous women that became a common usage. In the mid 80s there was a logo on the football helmets and a shoulder patch on the hockey jerseys. That was there till 91 or 92 — all indigenous references. So it's not just a passing thing, is it?

MN: We're not disagreeing with the various things that happened. And I think that McGill has to be fully able to discuss stuff warts and all. I mean there is no shying away from it. It is what it is. I think the other point of that too is that there are many, many Indigenous groups that don't consider Indigenous symbols or names as offensive. So that's just another side of the argument. I know that the young man leading the charge is Indigenous. You could refer to a letter from Francis Barrow Paul, a former hockey player that his letter which went to the principal and also to La Presse and the Gazette, He has a different opinion. He is very proud to be a Redman. There is a laundry list of team names that you can search online that have that position as well.

CO: And so if you're saying that this is a debate, a discussion, and something will be concluded from it. How much weight should be given to your voice and other alumni from McGill who donate, and are very active at the university. How much weight should the university give to voices like yours?

MN: I'm hopeful that the university is a reasonable place and is going to listen to all stakeholders whatever their interest is and have a good look at this and consider all the facts. Don't be in a hurry to bury your history explain it and come through a reasonable process and make a reasonable decision.

CO: We will leave it there. Mr. Nelson, thank you.

MN: Thank you very much. Have a good day.

JD: Michael Nelson is a former captain of the McGill hockey team. He was in Montreal.

[Music: Ambient]

Ireland underwear

JD: In Cork, Ireland today, hundreds of protesters laid underwear on the steps of the city's courthouse. It's a response to a recent rape trial in Cork, where the 17-year-old victim's lace thong was used as evidence against her. A jury found the accused not guilty. In Ireland's legislature this week, MP Ruth Coppinger protested by brandishing a lace thong into the chamber. Here she is, followed by a response from Ireland's Prime Minister, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar.

[sc]

RUTH COPPINGER: Why has nothing yet been done to stop the routine use of rape myths in trials? And how concerned is this government about the chilling effect this is having on victims coming forward? A barrister actually told a jury to, quote, “look at the way she was dressed.” That she was, quote, “Open to meeting someone.” And, quote, “Because she wearing a thong with a lace front.” A 17-year-old is put in the dock for her choice of underwear? Women in this country are getting a little bit weary at the routine victim blaming going on in Irish courts, and the failure of lawmakers in this house to do anything about it. It might seem embarrassing to show a pair of thongs here in this incongruous setting. But the reason I'm doing is how do you think a rape victim or a woman feels at her underwear being shown in a court.

LEO VARADKAR: Thanks. And let me say this, and let there be no doubt about it. Nobody asks to be raped. And it's never the victim's fault. It doesn't matter what you wear. It doesn't matter where you went. Or what you took, whether it was drugs or alcohol. Nobody who is a victim of sexual violence, nobody who is a victim of rape, is ever to blame for the crime committed on them. And I believe that any defense on those lines is absolutely reprehensible.

[/sc]

JD: That was Ireland’s Prime Minister, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar, and before him, MP Ruth Coppinger in Ireland's legislature yesterday.

[Music: Horns]

Rohingya repatriation

Guest: Chris Melzer

JD: Repatriation is imminent, for some. A list has been assembled of Rohingya refugees living in camps in Bangladesh, who are to be sent back to Myanmar. They had fled what a UN fact-finding mission has called a genocide. And many are not ready to return. Chris Melzer is with the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. We reached him in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh.

CO: Mr. Melzer, what are you hearing from Rohingya refugees in Cox's Bazar about the prospect of going home?

CHRIS MELZER: Well, I just returned from one of the refugee camps and the people are very concerned about what's going on. When you talk to the people they say yes, we would like to go back to our home country, but not under these conditions yet. And that's why they are very concerned.

CO: But the conditions where they are in those camps and in Cox's Bazar are terrible from what we've been told. So why are they resisting any opportunity to return to Myanmar?

CM: Well, the conditions are indeed not very good. Kutupalong is the biggest refugee camp in the world. built out of bamboo and tarpaulin with not proper sanitation and so on. The difference is the people are here in Bangladesh in safety, and they don't think that the same condition is at home in Myanmar.

CO: What are they hearing from back home? Are they in touch with people who are telling them that the conditions are not safe?

CM: They say they have relatives, they have friends home in the Rakhine State, and that these relatives are telling them don't come home now because it's still not the situation that we are citizens like other people in Myanmar. And there's still not the situation that it's good to come home.

CO: So why is there this plan or this effort on the part of Bangladesh to repatriate them? Is it based on anything? Have they had any negotiations with Myanmar that would indicate that this is something that they can do?

CM: Well there is a joint working group out of the governments of Myanmar and Bangladesh, but UNHCR was not part of these joint working group. And that's why I can't really answer this question, so please ask the governments — they know better.

CO: Yet, they're saying that these people are to go home. They have names of people, lists of people, and they say these are the ones we're going to start sending home. Did these people have any discussions? Were they asked if they want to return?

CM: As far as we know, not. The first estimate of a thousand people was made by the government of Bangladesh. And then this list was cleared by the government of Myanmar. And there are 2,260 people now on this second list. UNHCR has nothing to do this. We made not the list; we were not a part of it. What we demanded was that the people have the right to go if they want to go voluntarily. And that's why we demanded that we can talk to everybody of them and really ask them if they are willing to go back to their home country voluntarily and based on a well-informed decision.

CO: As people learn that they are on these lists, how are they responding?

CM: The people responded very concerned. Many of them had no idea that they are on this list. Many people also came to UNHCR and asked for guidance, asked for advice, and yeah we really say many people are concerned about that.

CO: But we’re hearing elsewhere that some of them are disappearing, they’re going into hiding, they're trying to escape the situation where they might be repatriated any day.

CM: Yes, we have also heard these stories that people try to go out of the camps where they could be found by the authorities. But you don't have necessary to go out of the camp. You can also hide inside the camp. You just go to relatives and stay there and their shelter.

CO: And so if this working group that this is OK, why has the UNHCR not been part of those discussions?

CM: Again, please ask the governments of Bangladesh and of Myanmar. But when this decision was made by the two governments, we at least made clear that the demands of the refugees are the demands of UNHCR that we say the return has to be voluntarily, in dignity, and in safety. And everything based on a well-informed decision.

CO: But we heard that people who did try to go back or were sent back we're not really given access to their homes — to their villages.

CM: Which is a problem UNHCR has that we have a memorandum of understanding with the government in Yangon, and part of it is that the UNHCR has the possibility to check these areas to the villages. But we do not have the unhindered access yet like it was promised. And that's why we still demand that. It would be a trust-building measure by the government of Myanmar if they just allow the refugees to go back to their home region and see with their own eyes how it has changed.

CO: I wonder if it makes your job that much more difficult in the refugee camps that people are being listed for repatriation back to Myanmar. Does it make it more difficult for you to get access to them? To get them to come and register or to seek help from the U.N. fearing that any recognition by any authorities puts them in some kind of vulnerability?

CM: Yeah, we see indeed a kind of general distrust in the last days and weeks. For example, we have a registration effort so that people are registered as refugees so they have access for things like food. Normally, we have per week several hundreds, if not thousands, of people who are asking to be registered. And this number has declined in the last days and weeks. And although we have nothing to do with these repatriation efforts, and we are not part of either government, it seems like the people are just have a general distrust in being registered or being on any list.

CO: All right. We will be following this story, as we have been. Mr. Melzer, I appreciate you speaking with us tonight. Thank you.

CM: Thank you.

JD: Chris Melzer is with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. We reached him in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh.

[Music: Sombre]

Kenyan runner

Guest: Marko Cheseto

JD: Most people towing the start-line of a marathon will have some pretty serious butterflies in the pit of your stomach. They are about to attempt running more than 42 kilometres, after all. And those butterflies multiply if they’re running in front of thousands of people at the New York City Marathon. Multiply them exponentially when it's your first go at running that full distance in a competition. But for Marko Cheseto, that nervous feeling was nothing compared to what he'd already been through to get to the starting line. Years before, Mr. Cheseto had lost both his feet to frostbite, in Alaska — he was running on prosthetic. We reached Marko Cheseto in Orlando.

CO: Marco, first of all, congratulations for finishing the marathon.

MARKO CHESETO: Thank you.

CO: What was your time?

MC: It was two hours, 52 minutes, and 33 seconds.

CO: And there was 50,000 people in that marathon; you finished 613th.

MC: Yes.

CO: Did you think you were going to do so good?

MC: No, I didn't really. When I was going to New York Marathon, my goal was to run a sub-three. And I didn't have a lot of anticipated. I was like you know, I'm going to go run for sub-three because it is my first marathon, so I didn't want to put too much expectation on myself.

CO: But you’re pleased?

MC: Oh yes, I am happy with time because it's my first one. And I have not really trained much. My training started in July the 21st of this year.

CO: And you have blades as your prosthetics, right?

MC: Yes.

CO: And so what was it like? Was there times during the course of the run when you just had doubts whether you could finish it? Was there some rough spots?

MC: You know, going through the bridges was kind of challenging because there was a steep incline. Even though it didn’t look like I was going uphill, but running on two prosthetics is challenging when the terrain just changes all of a sudden.

CO: Can I ask you about what happened? Because you were going to university in Alaska on a scholarship, and you ended up getting serious frostbite on your feet back in 2011. What happened?

MC: In February of 2011, my cousin who came from Kenya committed suicide. And we were going to school in the University of Alaska. Had called me one Friday afternoon wanting to talk, but I was doing some schoolwork and I was not able to get out of the house and go and talk with him. I got home that evening and he had hanged himself. I was depressed for almost a year, blaming myself of what I could have done to save his life. And I was on anti-depressants for almost that whole year. And November of 2011, I took anti-depressants and went for a run, and I passed out.

CO: Out in the cold?

MC: Yes, out in the cold. I didn't have anything. I just had a jacket and sneakers. I didn't have any gloves, nor a hat. I just was going for a run. It was not so cold when I left. But fifty-six hours in the cold, I woke up in the middle of the night, and you know the moon shine was like shining really, really well, and just realized where am I? Luckily I just tried to get up, which took some time. It was not just like oh, I need to stand up and walk. It took some time because I was in a wooded area, so I used the trees to get myself up and walk. And luckily I just tumbled on ski trail and I just followed it and ended up in a hotel lobby that was close by the university. And that's when somebody at the lobby commented that where have you been for three days. That is when I realized how long I had been out. I didn't know it was three days.

CO: I'm so sorry about your cousin, and I'm so sorry about what happened to you. Your feet were in bad shape at that point.

MC: Yes. So I don't remember how I got to the hospital because I passed out, and then I couldn’t feel my feet. Then I don't remember the exact timeline that I was in the hospital when they were trying to maintain my core temperature. But, at the end of the day, they tried to check the blood flow to my lower extremities, and my feet didn't show any sign of blood. At that point, the doctor told me there is a 100 per cent chance that we might amputate your feet.

CO: And so they had to amputate both your feet at that point?

MC: Yes, below the knee.

CO: Below the knee. And so how difficult was the recovery? How difficult was it to get back to where you were able to run that marathon?

MC: You know, it was a challenge that you know I didn't have time to think about. Like, I didn't contemplate about losing my feet. It was so sudden that they said we have to do it now. But it took some time before I could really acknowledge that I had lost my feet. But I was in a severe depression. But, surprisingly, after they amputated my feet, I kind of started feeling better after two weeks of amputation.

CO: It just shows you have just tremendous spirit, Marco. Because you're recovering from so much, weren't you? From the death of your cousin, from what happened to your feet, and to where you are now where you finished a marathon.

MC: And I think you know that incident in a way taught me. It opened my eyes in different ways — in a lot of ways. I mean there are so many things that we have control of in life. And you know after losing my cousin and then my feet, I think it helped me know how to cope with situation realizing that sometimes in life there's so many things that you cannot control. But you can do so much with what you can control. And I just realized I have control of what I could do from that point going forward. I said you know I am an amputee and I'm going to be like this for the rest of my life. I can choose to either sit down and feel sorry for myself or just stand up and say you know what. I got this I'm going to use this to my advantage. I'm going to run again. I'm going to use my story to inspire other people. And that's what I've been doing.

CO: Marco, It's really good to talk to you. And I'm so happy for all the things that have gone right for you.

MC: Thank you very much.

CO: Take care. Bye bye.

MC: Bye.

JD: Marko Cheseto lost both his feet to frostbite in 2011. On November 4th, running with prostethics, he finished 613th out of 50-thousand people in the New York City Marathon. We reached Mr. Cheseto in Orlando, Florida. You can read more about this story, and see some pictures of him in action, on our website: cbc.ca/aih.

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

November 14, 2018 episode transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode