We won't let COVID-19 measures strip our freedoms away, says U.S. protester

Guests: Mike Detmer, Charles Sykes

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: Our community is struggling. My husband is on unemployment for the first time in our life and it's unwillingly that we're taking unemployment.

VOICE 2: It's time for our state to be opened up. We're tyred of not being able to buy the things that we need. Go to the hairdressers, get our hair done. It's time to open up.

VOICE 3: Nobody's suggesting we just go willy nilly, go back to work. We're recommending we adopted the size of federal guidelines and do it safely.

VOICE 4: We have common sense. We're not children. We know what's right and what's wrong. You know how to take care of ourselves.

MG: They called it Operation Gridlock. Thousands of protesters took to the streets in Michigan this week opposing orders to stay at home. And that, frankly, was the point to protest lockdown restrictions. Similar demonstrations happened in North Carolina, in Kentucky and in Ohio. And more are planned in Texas, California and Oregon. My next guest was one of the thousands at that protest. He's also running for U.S. Congress. Mike Detmer is in Livingston County, Michigan. Mike, hello.

MIKE DETMER: Good morning.

MG: Why are you protesting? Stay at home. Orders in the middle of a pandemic?

MIKE DETMER: You know, it's really not, it's a little bit of a misnomer about protesting 'stay at home'. I think most people are okay with that. Most people are doing all of the things necessary to stay safe and keep their families safe. What this was really about was the governor's overreach with her executive orders. It goes far beyond just staying home. Businesses are affected. A lot of businesses that really shouldn't be, simple things; going to the store, what you can buy. Those are the kind of things that people are upset about.

MG: Why do you say it's an overreach?

MIKE DETMER: Well, first of all, you've got to look at in the U.S. what the, you got to look at constitutionality. You've got to look at what our Supreme Court has deemed that states can do, what power to the states have. In the past when any any type of epidemic or disease was rampant, polio, you name it, supreme Court cases have said that the states have the ability to quarantine sick people, remove them from a healthy population. And in this case, all people are quarantined. And you know what? Most people get it. We understand why. But at the same time, our president's made a great point. The cure can't be worse than a disease. And so what a lot of people are calling for, especially in Michigan. Michigan is not, COVID is not widespread throughout the entire state. We have some very hard hit areas like Wayne County in Detroit. But what people are saying is, look, in the rest of the state, let's start to gradually get things opened back up. Let's get businesses going. You've got private contractors like realtors, builders, subcontractors, people that can do their job without having to really have much contact with any other human being. And they're shut down and there's no support for them.

MG: Tell me a little bit about the economic situation we heard in that little clip. People talking about needing unemployment insurance, for example. What is the economic situation for people who are at that protest?

MIKE DETMER: Well, you had. It was a you had a wide array of people of all different walks of life and, you know, it was tough to get a true sense because I think most people were in their cars. There were pictures of people getting out on the capital lawn, but that wasn't the majority. That was a very small minority when you're talking about 25,000 to 30,000 people that poured into the city of Lansing. But I believe you had people from all different walks of life. But you've got, again, people that are on unemployment. But are they going to be able to go back to work at the small company they worked for? You know, we have a bigger issue right now with on the federal level. Money was set aside for small businesses to be able to apply for a loan and the money's gone. And there's a lot of businesses that have not been able to apply for a loan because no one a lot of them couldn't get through to start with. And now they're being told, well, sorry, the money's gone. So these businesses may not be able to open back up if things don't start to progress.

MG: That's the economic situation. But this is a health care crisis. At least 30,000 people have been infected in your state. More than 2000 residents have died from COVID-19. Hospitals in in Detroit in that area are overwhelmed with patients. And the request from people who are on the front lines, the doctors and nurses who are working on the front lines is stay home. Why is it a good idea to ease restrictions now?

MIKE DETMER: Well, again, you have areas that are hard-hit like Detroit and those areas, you've got a massive number. Most of the cases in the entire state are in Detroit. But if you look at Traverse City, if you look at the upper peninsula of Michigan, if you look at the west side of the state where there are very few, if any, cases whatsoever, let's get people back to work. Let's start there. It's a common sense approach to start getting things rolling down.

MG: Would people not move between those various jurisdictions?

MIKE DETMER: You know, people are moving now anyway? I mean, you have people- here's one of the things that people were protesting in the governor's executive order. If you have two homes, if you have a vacation home in northern Michigan and you live in southern Michigan, you are not allowed to travel to your vacation home. But if you live in Ohio and you have a vacation home in northern Michigan, by all means, come, come travel. So that's happening already. That's the core of why people are upset, because these executive orders, there was really very little thought put into the ramifications of what she said.

MG: The governor has said we know this demonstration is going to come at a cost to public health and to people's health. And the sad irony is that the protest will lead to perhaps an extension of the stay at home order because people were out there without masks, as you mentioned, thousands and thousands of people gathering around. Do you worry that a protest like this could actually extend what it is the people were protesting against?

MIKE DETMER: Well, you know what? Here's the thing that I noticed as well. Most of the people that were out of their cars were protected. They had masks, they had gloves. There were few a few that did not. But you know what? There were a lot of police officers down there patrolling the entire situation. And I saw, I think, two that had masks on the rest of the police force that were down there had no masks. But some of them had gloves.

MG: Can ask you about some of those people? You posed with a group of protesters for a selfie. That photo has been criticized for a number of reasons, one of which is because you're in a huge group of people that certainly aren't keeping any sort of distance between individuals, not six feet around him. Why would you do that?

MIKE DETMER: Well, that was a staging area to join this caravan. And everybody that was there were keeping their distance. They were wearing masks. And we came together for a brief picture where people took their masks off to have their faces in the shot. And then everybody went back to their distancing and put their masks and gloves back.

MG: You don't worry about the public health ramifications of that of a being around a group of people, you know, cheek to jowl.

MIKE DETMER: For it for a quick picture? No.

MG: Now, one of the other reasons that this has been criticized is because there are signs for the proud boys, the far right group there, somebody who's making a white supremacist symbol in that photo. What's really going on there?

MIKE DETMER: Well, I had no idea who the proud boys were when that picture was taken. In fact, this whole storm about that, I actually did some research. I spoke to the chairman of the group. And you know what? The chairman - they were called a white supremacist group. The chairman. The national chairman is actually black Cuban.

MG: It's a far right group, though. I mean, let's be honest.

MIKE DETMER: Well, I don't know if you only want to call it far right. What I found out and what in what they say they stand for is protecting First Amendment, which is freedom of speech, Second Amendment right to bear arms. All of the tenants of protecting freedoms is what they say they do. I've asked people to give me evidence that they are some kind of a hate group. I haven't found any whatsoever.

MG: I guess the question is in part it's about you being in the photo. But also there are some of the photos from people with assault rifles, with full body armour. What does this protest really about? Is it about these restrictions or is it a political rally?

MIKE DETMER: Well, it's both. It's both because what you're what people are saying, especially the ones that we're carrying and by the way, those weapons were not loaded, but it was. It was a statement that we are there to protect our freedoms. We're not going to sit back and have all of our freedoms stripped away. It's one thing to say, look, we need to keep our distance and stay at home and let's let this thing pass. Everybody gets that. But at the same time, we recognise that if the if if something like this happens and people are just willing to give up all of their rights and freedoms, the fear is that once you do that, you don't get them back.

MG: Even in the face of a global pandemic.

MIKE DETMER: In any situation. Do you give up all of your rights or do you not? Thomas Jefferson made a statement, you know, back, he is one of our founders. He said, give me dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery. And that is the thought there is that, look, we want to maintain our rights. We're going to co-operate. But you're not going to tell us that we can't go out on our boat away from everybody. I mean, these are the these are the foolish things. You're not going to tell me that I have to lose my business even though I don't come in contact with people because you've decided to do so.

MG: Mike Detmer, it's good to speak with you. Thank you. Thank you. Mike Detmer is running for U.S. Congress in Michigan. Charlie Sykes is an editor at large at The Bulwark, a political news Web site. He is the author as well of How the Right Lost Its Mind. He is in Milwaukee. Charlie, good morning to you.

CHARLES SYKES: Good morning.

MG: What do you make of what Mike Detmer just had to say?

CHARLES SYKES: Well, let's just start with the Proud Boys. The Proud Boys, notorious sort of neo fascist organisation organizations, sort of known for its anti-immigration, white supremacist, anti Semitic rhetoric. So let's just set that aside. This is not a First Amendment type organisation. Look, there's a lot going on here. There are deep roots to what I've described is sort of the populist libertarianism. Don't tread on me. You know, the quotes from Thomas Jefferson. And I do think it's incumbent on local officials to make sure that the regulations they put in place are understandable, that they're coherent. You need people to voluntarily go along with them. So anything that smacks of being arbitrary or draconian is going to lead to a certain pushback. But I think that what you're seeing - and I'm glad you're focussing on it - what you're seeing is, I'm afraid, the tip of some real ugly divisions that are about to happen, where the response to the pandemic, rather than being a moment of pulling us together, is about to become another demonstration of how tribalized our politics has become. People are lining up. Democrats versus Republican red versus blue.

MG: Let's get into that in a minute. You talked about the arbitrariness, and that's one of the complaints, not just from Mike, but from others who have talked about this, that some of the rules around what people can and can't do, for example, in Michigan, seem arbitrary. Is there some validity to that?

CHARLES SYKES: There is, but I want to make it clear that, look, we're having this discussion at a moment where more than 33,000 Americans have died. I think that undercounts the number of Americans. I think that we are on track to lose more than 70,000 of our countrymen. This is a major health crisis. And I think that most of the stay at home orders are completely rational. Some of the rules, I think they'll probably do go a little bit too far. And this is always the balancing that you're going to have at the moment like this. But I think that what you're seeing is the way that you have opportunistic extremists who are exploiting these issues at a time of real danger, not having a protest in Lansing, Michigan, posing for selfies, gathering around without masks, you know, is frankly is grossly irresponsible. But I think unfortunately, it's kind of reflect the kind of politics that we have here.

MG: Is this a grassroots movement or is there some sort of scale political force that's behind this?

CHARLES SYKES: Well, it's grassroots-like, but clearly this this appears to be it appears to be a loosely coordinated, you know, President Trump, rather than providing comfort and unity at this moment, that's kind of send out the signal. He was very clear about it, setting up the signal that he kind of gives a wink and a nod to this. So all around the country, you are now starting to see Republican legislators push back against these close orders. The demonstrations, which kind of have a zombie Tea Party vibe to them, are springing up. You do have some queer activists who have decided that they're going to get involved in this. Some of the old Tea Party organizations. It was one of Betsy DeVos family, Betsy DeVos is the education secretary, one of her top advisers was intimately involved in organising what happened in Michigan. So this didn't just happen spontaneously. And unfortunately, this is now going to become part of the cause of many people who are associated with Trump World as we're trying to delicately navigate this moment of how to be open the country without reigniting the pandemic. What you're seeing is this sort of is this this this, again, rather extreme pushback from people who I think have multiple agendas.

MG: Where do you think this goes from here. There are, as you mention. It wasn't just that protests in Michigan. There've been protests throughout the United States. And more set to come. Last night to the president lays out his plan for starting to, as you say, delicately reopened the economy and whether that's delicately handled or not in some ways will depend on how he proceeds, but also how governors proceed. Where do these sort of protests and those sorts of divisions go from here?

CHARLES SYKES: I'm really worried about this. I wrote a piece a couple of weeks ago for NBC to talking about the danger of having a red blue reopening. Where it where the social distancing now becomes kind of a signal of your political loyalty, because the only way this works is if we're all in this together. This can come back in in a very violent way. And I think that what you're seeing is that you are having that kind of politicization on steroids so that we are going to pit the blue states against the red states. We're going to pit counties against one another, and it's going to become a sign of political loyalty. So, and again, as I mentioned before, it's not just a protest. You have Republican legislators around the country. In my home state of Wisconsin, they're talking the Republicans are talking about firing the state health director because they've extended the lockdown order. This is the last thing that you want at a moment where literally the stakes are life and death.

MG: Do you expect there to have real public health impacts because of these sorts of protests?

CHARLES SYKES: Yes, I'm very afraid of that. I mean, people need to remember that it was the second wave of the Spanish pandemic that killed the most people. This thing is not over. You look at the charts, there are indications that we may be flattening the curve, but we are flattening the curve because we have been doing these aggressive mitigation efforts. If those mitigation efforts become highly politicized and people feel the need to go out and engage in performative disobedience, and that's what that was yesterday, you know, performative libertarianism, that may make them feel good. It may score points. It may help Donald Trump, perhaps. But the danger to the public health is very real. It doesn't take a lot of vectors for this to flare back up. And each one of those pictures is a potential vector, because we have, we may be about to turn the corner and but we have not yet turned the corner. By the way, this rhetoric about the cure being worse than the disease. The only people who use that cliché are people who have not seen what the disease is actually doing. You know, there's a certain callousness that is shocking to me as a long-time conservative watching what used to be the pro-life party basically say, yes, people are going to have to die, but we need to reopen these retail stores. If you really think through what we're talking about, it really is a discussion of the value of human life and importance of public health.

MG: Charlie Sykes, good to speak with you. Thank you.

CHARLES SYKES: Thank you.

MG: Charlie Sykes is editor at large at the Bulwark. This is The Current on CBC Radio One. I'm Matt Galloway. This is going to be pretty good. Little musical treat for you because of what happened yesterday through you. Yesterday Daveed Goldman and Nobu Adilmann were on this program in 2011. The pair started Choir, Choir, Choir, super popular weekly drop in singing event in Toronto. They can't do what they do, these big physical get togethers anymore because of the stay at home guidances. So instead they're doing these virtual choir-antine sessions. And at the end of our conversation about the power of music and the way that music can bring people together. Daveed and Nobu asked you to partake in a sing along with them with the caveat that you record yourselves doing it. A number of you did just that. My feed was filled yesterday with people singing across this country. Here now, The Currents first attempt at a virtual cross. Canada sing along.

SOUNDCLIP

[Singalong]

MG: Give yourselves a round of applause. It feels better to sing with strangers, doesn't it? Thank you, Canada, for that. This is The Current on CBC Radio One.

Chinese community

Guests: Stanley Zheng, Nelly Gong, Aaida A. Mamuji

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

[Music: Theme]

MG: Still to come. Cracking down on pandemic lies. There is a proposal to punish those who knowingly spread bad information. We'll hear more about that soon. But first, early action against an emerging threat.

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

While the risk of an outbreak of novel coronavirus in Canada remains low, I encourage Canadians to tell your health care professional. If you've travelled to an affected area of China and develop flu like symptoms.

MG: That was back on January 26th, might seem like a lifetime ago, given where we are now. The Health Minister Patty Hajdu with the chief public health officer at her side, reassuring Canadians that the risk to the public from a novel coronavirus was low. In Chinese communities in Canada. Many people were already having a very different reaction to the news emerging from Wuhan. Some already beginning to practise physical distancing and self-isolation measures that have since become commonplace for us all. Among those urging precautions. Then was Dr. Stanley Zheng, a family physician in Scarborough. He joins me now. Doctor, good morning.

STANLEY ZHENG: Good morning, Matt.

MG: When did you first become aware of this new health threat coming out of China?

STANLEY ZHENG: Well, I mean, that would take us stories away back to December.

MG: December.

STANLEY ZHENG: Yes. I was at a cottage in December when we first heard there was a human to human transmission here. So actually, prior to that, there was a lot of things going on. So you have to explain the stories in the totality. We probably have to bring your way back to somewhere in November, October. And allow me to just explain. We are primary care physicians, mostly family doctors and a few pediatricians and a few community psychiatrists looking after Easter n GTA part of the community. And naturally, because of the demographics there, we inherited a significant percentage of Chinese-Canadians living in the east part of the GTA. And we have a 20 plus physicians and all of us have experienced the SARS, H1N1, Asian flu and Bird flu in different locales of the world. Some of them at that time we were practicing in Asia. Some of us, like me, had practiced in Toronto area. And this group of doctors who believe very strongly in the four principles of their primary care to the web, providing that we are skilled physicians, have many, many years of experience dealing with infectious disease, and that we're always on the lookout for novel new infectious disease coming out from world hotspots.

MG: But if you were having these conversations in October, November and December, that's months before most of us were even aware that this was going on. Where were you getting that intelligence? Where was that information coming from?

STANLEY ZHENG: Very good question. We can't get into intelligence from our patients who are travelling back to China for Christmas and New Year. So they were there on the ground already. And we then the next wave of information we got, it was for the patients who were travelling back for the Chinese New Year. That's a January 25th. So they've spent the Chinese New Year there. So we have patients on the ground there. So that's why the primary care principle that we so cherish is so important, which is that assaulted the patient and the physician relationship. So they were there. They gave us the information. On top of that, all of us who have connections, back in China within the medical community, so we've been getting information that's coming from the physicians who are practicing there. And that we also get information from our current patient who travelled to there. And I'll give you the information. So in other words, we're getting information that Real-Time, unfiltered. And those medical intelligence are very important for us to make the decisions to take care of the population we're taking care.

MG: Tell me about those decisions that you made because you started taking precautions in your own practise, but then started urging travellers who, as you mentioned, were coming back from China to self isolate. When was that?

STANLEY ZHENG: Well, we've first started telling patients to - let me just go back to my timeline - in January the 13th.

MG: Wow.

STANLEY ZHENG: When we first started taking actions. This is what we did in January, searching. We told and our close families and close friends privately that don't go to China. We'll be issuing our own advisory, travel advisories, which are very different department with the government.

MG: As early as January.

STANLEY ZHENG: That's right. January 13th. And that we started to instructing our receptionist to screen for travel histories. Because we know that the first wave of travellers going back for a New Year's Eve and for Christmas, they are already coming back to you.

MG: Then you move beyond your own practise and put out an open letter that was circulated widely among the Chinese-Canadian communities and tried to make an effort to influence that broader conversation. Why did you do that? Why did you let people in the general community know that what you were [unintelligible].

STANLEY ZHENG: That's a that's going to be a long story to explain that.

MG: Just briefly, if you can. Yes.

STANLEY ZHENG: Yes, sure. So in January this 13, we started to have front desk screening protocols. And for the January the actually 22ndwe already published in our post, in our social media, in our group and social media to tell the public that they should have cancelled their trip branded a trip Spectre China for the Chinese New Year, which is January 25th. And then we've been already telling the patients that if they wanted to go, if they're unable to cancel the trip, that January 22nd, we told them you need to wash your hands, wear your masks. And if you go to visit crowded places wear goggles, protect your eyes. And then we recommend that if you come back to Canada, make sure you stay home for 14 days. So we already have been telling them that. And we also specifically told them that if you go to the E.R., come to the clinic. Give us a call before you come. So we know you are coming so we can schedule you towards the end of the day, rather than beginning of the day to reduce the transmission in our waiting rooms, as you know, tend to be very crowded. So next time line, we started doing things differently. January 29, when we started practicing virtual care without, you know, government giving us take [unintelligible] codes, rather virtual care at that time. So that was a way before. And we be telling patients who are having respiratory symptoms, who are coming back from China and to not come into the office, but talk to us on the video chat so we can see them, see how they are doing. And then we see them if necessary.

MG: While all this is going on, I want to bring in Nelly Gong. She is a community leader in Mississauga. He has a lot of work that she's done with the Chinese Advisory Council at the United Way in Toronto. She's been listening. And Nelly, good morning to you.

NELLY GONG: Morning, Matt.

MG: When did you start becoming concerned about the coronavirus? We're hearing from the doctor that he had concerns at the end of last year and was doing things at the beginning of January. When did you start to have these concerns?

NELLY GONG: Because of the burst out in China and our Chinese community, we all have the family. There's a friend in China. So since the Wuhan's situation comes up, we all closely monitor WeChat, which is the Chinese community platform, globally connected. I think in the GTA, even the national wise, the Chinese-Canadian starting forming those WeChat helping group for the self-isolation are we call the self-quarantined. It's around early February.

MG: I was in Vancouver in early February and I saw in Chinese restaurants, in Chinese malls, there was a huge drop in business. And talking to people there, they said that people were staying away and it was people from the community. Is that something that you noticed in the Toronto region is well?

NELLY GONG: Yes. Yes. Because on January 25th, 26th, was the Chinese New Year. But a lot of that event being scheduled for 30 February. The last big event I attended was the February 1st, the one that was the last one I attended. And that is a big event is [unintelligible] it also you involved a main [unintelligible], but just for the Chinese community, is all provincial fork town gathering, schools, university alumni gathering, these kinds much earlier than that.

MG: And why did you personally start to avoid those crowds?

NELLY GONG: Well, for me, because I'm a community leader, especially in the west of the GTA. Now, United wanted expending this Chinese advisory council cross the GTA board. So I do keep an eye on what's going on in the east end. So it seems I've realised it's come with the demand. People travelling back to Canada and most of them have a small family. They don't have a relative. So they have to reach out to the friend. They realise we need to be isolated. We need those self-quarantine 14 days. So they reach out. Then the community itself starting each of the helping group in a different City.

MG: Why do you think, Doctor, that the community was moving so quickly and so far ahead of those recommendations from Public Health Authority?

STANLEY ZHENG: Well, I think is because- I can only speak for the information I have from my patients and from working in the community. I think it has because of the travellers were heading back for the New Year's Eve and the Christmas break and the already experiencing it personally, directly first hand and how devastating this virus can be and this disease can be. And so they being very cautious. And the practise of social distancing, I think is started to in China so they brought that practise back. Hence, we as a community, we started social distancing. We ahead of the curve that we're seeing now.

MG: You also mentioned the experience of the community with SARS and H1N1. What did that do in terms of shaping your response?

STANLEY ZHENG: Well, we've definitely learned for our group of physicians that for a infectious disease to propagate, you need a host. So if person A has the virus or bacteria or whatever the passage is, it it needs to go onto the next person. If you break into this chain, if you have that person A, two person B, there is a huge distance. The virus cannot jump through. Then you break the transmission. So the social distancing works back in China in December, in January, and it is proving working now.

MG: Nelly, what role do you think Chinese communities experience with SARS and H1N1 had on how they reacted to this coronavirus?

NELLY GONG: Compared to that this time. Chinese community is really responding fast and promptly, especially with those acquainting self quarantine supporting group. So people connected with those group even when they were in China. And they are a range of where they can stay, who will pick them up and touch the pick up from airport where they can stay for that 14 days. So that is so efficiently break the chain as doctor mentioned, the chain that's so efficient.

MG: Doctor, we just have about a minute or so left and we're still in the midst of this. It's hard to tell where we're going when it comes to this pandemic. But what impact do you think those early efforts, the early steps that you took had on the spread of the virus in the community?

STANLEY ZHENG: Well, I think we certainly can see off the first two waves of travellers coming back from the first hot zone, which in China, the Christmas Breakers and the New Year travellers. The two waves of Chinese are coming back. Because of the practise of social distancing, because of the practise of voluntary stay in a home for 14 days, we did not see a widespread community outbreak. In other words, that we did not see a community based transmission, as we are seeing now with travellers coming back from other parts of the world hotspot.

MG: And you think it was because of those steps that you took at the beginning of January?

STANLEY ZHENG: I cannot prove it. And I think of the credit goes to these travellers who voluntarily go into the self-isolation, because as one patient told me, directly, when I ask why you're doing this. You know, you're suspending your liberty for two weeks and you're healthy. And they said, you know what? We know at that time there were some asymptomatic transmission back in Wuhan and that he were very afraid he said Canada is the country of my choice. And I don't want to bring a virus back to the country I love so much. And that is where I choose to live and for my children as well.

MG: Doctor, it's fascinating. I appreciate you speaking with us this morning. Thank you.

STANLEY ZHENG: You're very welcome.

MG: And Nelly, thank you very much. Yes, Dr. Stanley Zheng is a family physician in Scarborough. Nelly Gong is a community leader in Mississauga active with the United Way, the Rotary Club and the Chinese Advisory Committee for the Peel Regional Police. So could early warnings from Chinese Canadians have made a difference in terms of whether health officials had been paying closer attention to those early warnings? Aaida A. Mamuji believes it's worth considering the what ifs. She teaches disaster and emergency management at York University. Aaida, good morning to you.

AAIDA A. MAMUJI: Thank you so much. Good morning.

MG: What do you make of what you've heard from Nelly Gong and Dr. Zheng?

AAIDA A. MAMUJI: I think it's amazing that we were able to see so much community mobilization. In fact, I've been recently funded through the Canadian Institutes of Health research with my team to actually interview in-depth different members of Chinese communities in the GTA. And in addition to the examples that Dr. Stanley and Nelly mentioned, there are so many other cases that really prove that the community was very aware of the seriousness of the situation because they are so connected to things that happen, you know, in mainland China and Hong Kong and Taiwan. You know, they have family and friends that were affected and we're sharing news. And so it reached here and that affected the actions that they were taking here in Canada.

MG: Tell me more about some of the other measures that you heard that are being taken place within the greater Toronto area Chinese communities.

AAIDA A. MAMUJI: Sure. So just to say, it helps to kind of get a timeline. So, you know, first reports of COVID in China around November 17th of last year. And then there was a whistleblower doctor who, you know, highlighted that there was a SARS like illness around early December. And so the community's already hearing these things from China. And then the central government of China poses that lock down and Wuhan on January 23rd. So between then and the early parts of January, I had has had had some of my interviewees tell me that their family and friends in China were starting to really encouraged them to be very cautious when they go outside. Some of them actually sent them masks. And so this is coming from China to here in Canada. And then, you know, you start seeing some of the things that your previous guest mentioned, which is people coming back from the Christmas spring deciding to self isolate on their own. We have had, you know, parents in the GTA send their schools with masks on as early as January and even some parents deciding to keep their kids at home because they wanted to avoid that exposure. You had requests by parents that you if families have travelled to China, maybe you should be asking those family members to kind of stay home. You have had groups of people write petitions at the end of January to the House of Commons, to the prime ministers, the minister of health, minister of transportation, requesting the suspension of flights from China to increase quarantine and screening measures. And, you know, you had both Chinese and non-Chinese supporters for those things.

MG: It just seems like there was a whole different conversation going on in Chinese communities about the threat of this virus. I mean, everybody's learning about it as it unfolds, but it seems like there's a different thread of conversation between what's happening in those communities, as I say, and what was happening with politicians and public health officials who were taking a different approach. Why do you think that was happening, unfolding that way?

AAIDA A. MAMUJI: Yes. So one thing to note, though, is that like any community, the Chinese community is definitely not homogeneous. So it's not like everybody in the Chinese community or who identifies as ethnically Chinese, you know, behaved in the same way during that time. What we're finding is it really does depend on how closely tied you are to what's happening in Asia and how, you know, whether you're following the news from that part of the world. And you know those who did take on those early measures, they should be credited because it wasn't only about, you know, them doing self-isolation and kind of keeping the seriousness of the virus within themselves. These petitions and these, you know, kind of alerts to school boards, they're trying to get the word out to the broader community. One thing that was really interesting is that even in Chinatown, you saw signs on some restaurant doors as early as February the 5th saying that, you know, these restaurants are using new measures such as disinfecting the kitchen and dining areas every four hours, employees wearing masks and replacing them every four hours, you know, providing hand sanitizer and masks to their customers. And this is as early as February the 5th. You also had the Chinatown business Improvement area purchased hundreds of wall sanitizers and distributed to local restaurants. You had other restaurants where they were checking the temperatures of their employees before they start their work and three times a day. And so these are really you know, it's really fascinating to see that some of these measures are what we're kind of encouraging people to do right now. And when the news started coming here, a lot of people from Asia did what they do in Asia often, which is very, very comfortable wearing masks, as early as January.

MG: Let me play you something from the news from February. This ran after an Asian mall in Burnaby, British Columbia ended up being completely deserted because there was this rumour that was circulating on Chinese social media that a mall employee had COVID-19. That rumour turned out to be false. This it features the voices of the B.C. Health Minister Adrian Dix, an NDP MP, Peter Juliane.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: Since this matter began, I have eaten here and I'm the minister of health for British Columbia. And I think that tells you what you need to know.

VOICE 2: Today, politicians from all three levels of government came together with one message. Don't let fear of a virus turn into a fear of each other.

VOICE 1: They normally come to Crystal Mall once a month. I'll be coming every week. My wife and I will become any, first of all, even more frequently, because we need to push back against the rumours and we need to push back against what is, in some people's case, blatant racism.

MG: When you hear that in hindsight, what do you think of this?

AAIDA A. MAMUJI: I think you know, I think it's very complex. And it's not as simple as what I had thought before I started speaking to members of the Chinese community. So absolutely there was a stigma. When you have parents say, oh, you know, we need to make sure that all the kids that travelled to China shouldn't be coming to school. You have to realise that most of the infections that came into Canada did not come from China directly. You know, it had already kind of spread around the world and people were travelling from all parts of the globe. And so that targeting, you know, is definitely not affected from a public health perspective. But what should be noted is that for many of these businesses that lost revenue or, you know, people stop going and visiting malls and whatnot, a lot of that also came from within the Chinese community themselves, as in the sense that the Chinese community are the ones that frequent those areas a lot. And, as I mentioned, a lot of them were already tapped into the seriousness of the virus. So they were avoiding all places, Chinese and non-Chinese. And so you had this situation, which you know for sure there is, on the one hand, public health precautions that are being taken and the other where it was kind of blown up out of proportion. And you're now stigmatizing or discriminating against communities. And you definitely have that that [unintelligible] form the community.

MG: Doctors Zheng was reluctant to take credit for early intervention measures. But in the remaining seconds that we have, briefly, is there one thing that you think public health and emergency managers should learn from what you've been researching?

AAIDA A. MAMUJI: Absolutely. And I think, you know what? What really needs to happen is realising that there's so much potential and capacity at the community level and that we really need to be listening and paying attention more. And this is not something novel. We talk about it all the time in emergency management that the community is the most informed that they are going to be able to really understand the seriousness of the situation or help us understand how to manage it or mitigate it better than anybody else coming from the top down. And here you have a case where the community was actually calling out. And I think for all of us, it's just a matter of realising that having that exchange with people on the ground is so important. And hopefully we move forward in that direction.

MG: Aaida, it's great to talk to you about this. Thank you for telling us about your research.

AAIDA A. MAMUJI: No problem. Thank you so much for having me.

MG: Aaida A. Mamuji is an assistant professor of disaster and emergency management at York University. In case you needed a reminder, it's Friday. The days have kind of flattened out over the last little while. These have been, I think it's fair to say, a trying few weeks. People need a bit of a lift. That is why next Friday, a week from today, we will dedicate this show to stories that have brought us a little bit of joy. We want to hear from you. What has brought you some moment of happiness and hope? Maybe you have some sort of tip on how you've been staying sane through this pandemic. These are difficult times. And we want to know which brought you a moment of joy over the last couple of weeks. It can be something small. One of the most revealing questions you can ask somebody is tell me the best thing that's happened to you this week. Let us know a moment of joy, that's happened to you. You can tweet us @TheCurrentCBC. You can comment on our Facebook page. Email us. And the best thing, if you can email us a voice message, go to cbc.ca/thecurrent. Click on the contact link to find our email address. Let us know what lifted your spirits, put a bit of a smile on your face in this difficult time. Again, go to cbc.ca/thecurrent and let us know your moment of joy by clicking on the contact link. We're back in about 90 seconds. This is an extended edition of The Current CBC Radio One. I'm Matt Galloway. Stay with us.

Advertising, Disinformation

Guests: Krystle Mullin, Damian Collins, Andrea Bellemare

MG: Hi, I'm Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: Morning. Time to see the groundhog?

VOICE 2: Yeah.

VOICE 1: I think it'll be in early spring.

VOICE 2: Didn't we do this yesterday.

VOICE 1: I don't know what you mean.

VOICE 2: Don't mess with me pork chop. What day is this?

VOICE 1: It's February 2nd, Groundhog Day.

VOICE 2: Yeah, I thought it was yesterday.

MG: This is your life. That, of course, was Bill Murray in Groundhog Day. His character is trapped in a loop, reliving that same day over and over and over again. And yes, that might sound like the life you are leading these days. Recently, Bill Murray played that character again in a commercial for Jeep. In it, you see Bill waking up about to relive the same day, but this time he stays in bed. And then on the screen, the lines appear, "Stay home. When this is all over, the trails will still be waiting". Jeep isn't the only brand trying to figure out how to sell its products during COVIE-19. This is a tricky time for advertising. Krystle Mullen as creative director with the ad agency RPA. Crystal, good morning.

KRYSTLE MULLIN: Hi, Matt. How are you?

MG: I'm well, what did you make of the Groundhog Day Jeep ad?

KRYSTLE MULLIN: I mean, I love that spot when I saw it during the Super Bowl. And so I think that they're repurposing of it actually makes so much sense right now and brings some levity to, you know, an uncertain time and align so well with Jeep grand purpose, which is to get people off roading and they're just reimagining their call to action, which is stay off the road, but in a really literal way right now. So I think it was really sweet and really smart. And I think the story behind it is really great. I have a friend who works on Jeep. He was telling me a little bit about how Bill Murray was very gracious, offering up, you know, content and the footage to be reimagined. So I love that. I think it's great.

MG: The reality is that Jeep is still trying to sell you a jeep. And that's a pretty difficult needle to thread at this time. How do companies and brands have to strike that balance? How are they going about doing that?

KRYSTLE MULLIN: Yes, I mean, I think that what's really interesting is that brands right now have to recognise that people are feeling feelings they've never felt before. And they I think brands need to think about their advertising in a different way because our feelings and our anxieties are at a heightened state and they're changing day by day. And so I think when when you think about trying to sell a product, you know, brands especially the brands that I'm currently working on are well aware of the fact that the first thing that people are thinking about when they wake up in the morning is not, oh, can I get a good deal on a car or can I buy a new sofa today? It really is how am I going to get through the day? How am I going to teach my kids what they need to know? What are we gonna have for lunch and dinner and breakfast? And I think that everyone's really living in the moment right now. And I think that brands that recognise that and speak to that. And I think a lot of and they're doing that already. We'll have success connecting with people.

MG: Let's hear some of these ads. There have been a number of them that have been released at this time that reflect in some ways that difficulty that you're talking about. This is from the car company Fiat.

SOUNDCLIP

Caio Italia. It's quite a time, huh. We know things are difficult, but we have found ourselves in tougher times before, you know what? There was always something that kept us afloat. Our drive and determination to face and embrace the unknown.

MG: That's the director, Francis Ford Coppola, speaking about what's been going on in Italy. And in the background, you see these photos of frontline workers and people who are wearing masks. There are stories of people, you know, with Fiat cars. It's trying to strike this balance, as you say. How do you go about doing that? Striking a balance between the realities of the pandemic and getting your product out there. Is that a good example?

KRYSTLE MULLIN: I think that, you know, such a sweet example you're seeing, I think generally we're seeing a lot of content where you're seeing empty roads, you're seeing frontline workers working really hard. You're seeing people in their homes. And I think that the Fiat example is doing that. And I think what's interesting about that spot - and I think you guys will probably put it up online peoples and check it out - that all of these images of frontline workers or people at home, people wearing masks are sort of interspersed with images of Fiat that are parked, that are still there, unmoving. And I think that's in and of itself sort of a pivot away from what you usually see in car ads, which is the cars zoom about around Cliffside Mountain, you know, along side or even down empty highway at night. And so I think, you know, Fiat, I think purposefully did that where they're saying to people, you know, we understand you're not in your cars right now. You're at home, and that's important. So I think it's a nice sentiment.

MG: What happens if you get it wrong?

MG: Oh I mean, I think that if a brand gets it wrong, there's there's opportunity for them to sort of maybe go ignored a little bit, which maybe isn't a bad thing depending on what they're trying to sell. But generally brands do have to adapt. You know, I think the messaging has to be tasteful and of the times that we're living right now. I think that the only way you - I mean, this is not the only way - but one of the ways a brand can get it wrong is if they sort of just ignore it all together. I think that Ace Metrix found that 75 percent of people believe that brands have a responsibility to help out during the pandemic. So I think that if you are not saying anything, people might notice that you're not saying anything or people might just forget about you. So that could be one way that brands get it wrong.

MG: Let me play one more. And this is a change in tone. Have a listen to this ad.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: Down to your last Dorito and the delivery is two weeks away? Consider your steps wisely.

[Bell rings]

VOICE 2: Groceries.

MG: So the ads we've been talking about up to this point have been very serious. This is Doritos talking about you're down to your last chip. And all you have is a crumb left. How does humour work at a time like this?

KRYSTLE MULLIN: This is a fun ad. I personally cannot relate to this because the way that I have been eating chips during this social distancing and self-isolation. The situation is not flowy.

MG: Yes, you and me, both.

KRYSTLE MULLIN: Yes. But I think that is a nice example of humour. And I think if anybody can get away with trying for humour during this time, it's Doritos. I think that, you know, another really good example of humour done well in this time is, I don't know if you've seen it, but the Burger King couch potato. They are telling people that it's a patriotic act to literally lie on your couch or open the Burger King app on your phone and order a whopper. And I think what's smart about that is actually they're mirroring the behaviour they want people to take. So literally the entire spot is just people on their couches, opening up the Burger King app or ordering a whopper and then, of course, they changed their tagline to include the word stay. So instead of home of the Whopper, Burger King was encouraging people to stay home of the Whopper. So I think like Doritos ad, Burger King ad, brands that usually take a humorous approach are sort of leaning into that a little bit harder. But I think what's really nice is if there's a sort of yes end at the end of it, where you know, Burger King is donating to the nurse's foundation of America and feeding nurses during this time so much.

MG: So much of this is about trying to figure out how to stay in the minds of your customers. And you just wonder whether when we come out of this - and your agency wrote a little bit about this in terms of talking about maintaining a customer's habit loop, whether the concern is that when we get out of this, people's habits will change, because they're not going out and they're not buying the things that they might have bought before. Maybe they realised that they don't need those things.

KRYSTLE MULLIN: Yes, it's it's so, so interesting. I mean, I think whether we are conscious of it or not, we all have these loops, these habit loops that are sort of ingrained into us. And I think, you know, the example that works well for me to think of is the morning coffee. You know, you swing by your local coffee shop or your Starbucks or Tim Hortons on in the morning and you get your coffee, you head into work. And at this time, as events pass, you as a consumer might ultimately decide that fancy coffee is not a necessity. You know, even when your daily commute is restored and we're back to, you know, life as we used to know it, you might never return to that six dollar coffee. So I think that brands have to begin to recognise that there is, I think, a challenge to losing those habits, those ingrained habits. But I think there's always another side of the coin, which is for every habit that's lost, there's an opportunity to sort of create a new habit. And you're seeing I think brands take that on. Gym brands are a great example where people come in to the gym, anything or working out, but they now are doing classes online. So I think that brands have to assume that people are not going to think about them in the same way as they used to as their habits begin to shift.

MG: Which is why they may try and tell you something different in the midst of this thinking that your habit might shift.

KRYSTLE MULLIN: For sure, a 100 percent.

MG: Krystle, good to talk to you about this. Stay safe and stay well.

KRYSTLE MULLIN: Thank you so much, Matt. Have a great day.

MG: And you, Krystle Mullen is the creative director with the ad agency RPA. She was in Toronto.

[Music]

MG: This is The Current on CBC Radio One. My name's Matt Galloway. It is one thing to misunderstand this novel coronavirus, but to purposefully spread lies about COVID19 and how to treat it. That is a different matter entirely. Perhaps even dangerous. And if my next guest has his way, sharing those lies would be illegal. Damian Collins is a Conservative MP in the UK and the co-founder of something called Infotagion It's a fact checking service specifically for COVID-19. Damian Collins, good morning.

DAMIAN COLLINS: Good morning. What are you calling on the UK to do about the deliberate spread of misinformation around the coronavirus and COVI-19?

DAMIAN COLLINS: Yes, well, I think the coronavirus is the first public health emergency in the age of social media, disinformation and that disinformation is having- it is affecting behaviour. It is we're seeing through research that is influencing people's views on what caused coronavirus and how it spreads and how they keep themselves safe. And I think that, if you will, an individual or organisation that is knowingly and maliciously at that scale, spreading disinformation, then, you know, that disinformation that you're spreading could kill people. It could lead people to take unnecessary risks or to respond in the wrong way and therefore could endanger lives. And I think we should see that as an offence and it should be an offence to someone to do it at scale and maliciously. And it should also, I think, then be a requirement for social media companies to act against the people who are doing this as well.

MG: And so if you had if you had this legislation, what would it look like and who would a target?

DAMIAN COLLINS: Well, I think it's a good working model for this already exists in Germany, which is the German hate speech laws which prevent the spreading of information, which is seem to be often sympathetic to Nazi ideology or sharing Nazi symbols. And that's a criminal offence in Germany to do that. And I think here with coronavirus, you would say if someone is operating networks of accounts or groups on social media reaching large audiences, then they are consistently using those groups to spread known sources of lies about rotavirus, lies about where it came from, how it spreads, how you protect yourself, information that could endanger public health, and then action to be taken against those individuals. Of course, one of the problems we have with social media is not always easy to trace who's doing it. And that's why to me, there would then be a secondary requirement on the social media companies as well.

MG: Well, what would that mean for for Facebook or for Twitter?

DAMIAN COLLINS: So under what I would say, Facebook would be, if we said, well, here is a group you've seen that this group of Facebook is being used to spread disinformation about coronavirus that could endanger public health. We want you to close it down. And we want you to close down the accounts, remove the accounts that are doing this, at least suspended, pending further investigation. And and if you don't do that, then you could become liable for that content existing. You could be the one that's committed the offence. And that's certainly the way that the hate speech laws working in Germany. And I think we could do the same thing with public health disinformation around coronavirus as well. So it's an offence to do it, but also it's an offence for the platforms to to know that it exists and felt right against it.

MG: Here in this country, Health Canada is monitoring misinformation. It's sending compliance letters to companies that are making false or questionable claims. People who are selling snake oil saying that this quackery will say you save you from COVID-19. Why is this legislation needed to go beyond something like that?

DAMIAN COLLINS: I think what we need to do is create a liability for the companies that the social media covers themselves as well. I think because we're cause we wanted to act on source. And if there are companies or individuals that knowingly spreading disinformation is a false remedies and so on, then we want to act against those people. But we also want to say I think the big social media platforms is you shouldn't be allowing them to use your network, the architecture of your networks to spread this content as well. And therefore, you know, we want to work together on this. But ultimately we think if we can identify clearly a problematic source, then then you should be acting [unintelligible], too. I think at the moment, a lot of the focus is on the individual pieces of content companies like Facebook and Twitter saying we'll remove a post someone's put up if we can see that that could endanger public health around coronavirus. But often what doesn't happen then is the same thing is then reposted moments later and the whole process starts over again. And there's often no action taken against the accounts that doing it just what they've posted. I think we need to do more, if you will, to take control of this.

MG: Is that possible? We've spoken with executives from Facebook here in Canada and they've compared it a bit to Whack-A-Mole. That game where the thing pops up and you bash. But then another thing pops up and you bash it. Is it possible for Facebook, for example, to keep a lid on all of that misinformation?

DAMIAN COLLINS: All of it, no. And that's why I think the issue, is scale and intent. So if someone is the controller of multiple linked accounts, large groups with hundreds of thousands of people, then that are clearly being used to spread disinformation on a consistent basis, they can do things about that to disrupt and break up these networks. They've been they've done that in the past with the foreign influence network from disinformation and politics. And they've got the capability to track misbehaviour as well. I think they can do that. And I think it's- I think that would be more effective than just trying to respond to individual stories that pop up. I think it's trying to disrupt the networks that are being created on these platforms to distribute this content. And what from imposing it, an individual person will make their friends can, you know, can can be misleading, but not necessarily damaging if it's not being amplified at scale. But of course, and I think as well as citizens, we need to do more to change our mindset to thinking, well, I'll share this to my friends just because it might be true, to thinking: I definitely won't share this unless unless I do know is true. And that's one of the reasons why we set up this new service infotagion.com to to create an online tool where people can easily check stuff based on at the fact checks, based on real messages people have seen, real messages people have seen and what fact checked and results posted.

MG: The Canadian government said it would consider a similar law to what you're proposing. And after that, the leader of the Conservative Party here, Andrew Scheer, tweeted, and this is a quotation: "Reports that the government is considering restricting free speech are very disturbing. The government should not take advantage of a health crisis to infringe on our hard fought freedoms. Conservatives will always stand up and protect freedom of speech and will oppose liberal government attempts to limit our freedoms and restrict people from challenging what the government says is or isn't true". What do you make of that?

DAMIAN COLLINS: Well, I think there's always been a tension between freedom of speech and the harm that speech from cause to others. And that's recognised in and around the world in law. And even I think that Mark Zuckerberg used that distinction when he spoke at Georgetown in Washington last year. And so I think even with the constitutional wise American side of the free speech, there's a recognition that if you're using your your freedom of speech to to say and do things which could lead to physical harm of other people, then that's not a right that you have there. There are still rules for the way we conduct ourselves in the public square. And I think those rules haven't been translated across social media in the way they happen in other media.

MG: Should those rules apply to politicians who think of Boris Johnson, British prime minister - who thankfully has recovered or is on the way to recovering from coronavirus in very serious condition - but it seems like just weeks ago he was standing in front of the media saying that he was going to continue to shake people's hands, that he'd been in a hospital where people had coronavirus and was shaking everyone's hand. And people at that time thought. What are you saying? Should this apply to politicians as well at side of the world of social media?

DAMIAN COLLINS: What politicians, we know, they'll give their view that policy people may agree with or disagree with it. That's a matter of public debate.

MG: Have enormous influence, though, don't they?

DAMIAN COLLINS: Yes. But that that's a matter of public discussion. What we have seen that is that this happened in Brazil with the president there, where it's been considered that the public health information they were giving was I was wrong and potentially dangerous. People followed it. And Twitter have removed tweets posted by the the president in that country. And I think it's right that they should intervene in that way if they think there's a public health risk to things people are saying what clear that's no longer acceptable guidance. I mean, what Boris Johnson said about shaking hands and this interaction public space was before the U.K. government changed its guidelines and brought in social distancing in response to the escalation of the crisis. It has been clear since then. So two things often change in the public policy landscape. But I don't think the leaders giving advice that can be clearly seen to be role misleading tend to be dangerous. I think it's right that people intervene against these comments when they occur as well.

MG: Damian Collins, it's great to speak with you about this. And we're going to follow this up with a conversation about what's happening here in Canada. Thank you.

DAMIAN COLLINS: Thank you very much.

MG: Damian Collins, Conservative MP in the UK and the co-founder of Infotagion, it's an independent fact checking service specifically for COVID-19. He was in London. The CBC has its own disinformation unit and reporter Andrea Bellemare is part of that team. She has been listening in. Andrea, good morning to you.

ANDREA BELLEMARE: Good morning, Matt.

MG: What do you make of what Damian Collins has proposed?

ANDREA BELLEMARE: Well, two things that he said really struck me. One of them is that we can see that there's actually an effect on people's health. For example, in Iran, 500 people died after drinking methanol because they thought that it could fight COVID-19. So when he talks about there being health risks and this is different from maybe some of the misinformation that we're seeing before, he's absolutely correct. And that is something that's really, really dangerous. The other thing that I thought that he understood and explained very well is when he talked about multiple linked accounts, because one of the things that we see here is that, of course, you might see one person post something and, you know, five of their followers see it. And it's not correct. But you said, well, I'm not going to spend time fact checking it because the impact hasn't been very widespread. But when you start getting two accounts that are consistently reposting information that you know is not correct and you know that those networks are out there, then it becomes easier both to do something about it and also to report on the effects of what that disinformation is. And I think one of the things you're asking him about was, you know, the difficulty of cracking down on it. And certainly there are different levels of players. And I think you probably would start with the higher levels.

MG: It's really interesting. And as you say, perhaps more difficult then than it initially seems. One of the things that you've been doing and you've been on the program regularly talking about it is having a look at the disinformation that you're finding online. Give me an example of what you've seen.

ANDREA BELLEMARE: Well, this week, one of the things that's been popping up a lot is we're seeing more we're getting more information about scams. And I know the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre says they've gotten more than 75 complaints of scams related to COVID-19. One that I got on my own cell phone was a text message from Netflix, or it purported to be from Netflix. And it said that payment need update.

MG: I got three of those yesterday.

ANDREA BELLEMARE: Yes. And there you go. Hey, wait, do I need to pay my Netflix account? Then you go, oh, no, this is not good English. This link is incorrect. And today police cybercrime unit also put out a warning about a scam where Canadians are being offered 20,000 free President's Choice Optimum points because of COVID-99. Again, you have to be really careful because they're always trying to get you to click on these things and go in and putting your personal information or your banking information or your address. And you do not want to do that.

MG: You've been looking into some reports about the origin of the COVID virus. Just tell us a little bit about that.

ANDREA BELLEMARE: Yes, this is something that, you know, you might have talked about before because of the conspiracy that the virus was created in the lab is something that keeps coming up. And again, this week, we're seeing that it's being reported in mainstream U.S. media outlets. One of the twists is not so much now that they think it's been created in the lab, but perhaps it had been isolated in the lab and it had escaped. So this is something that keeps coming up. And, you know, in this kind of thing, I defer to the scientists because I myself am not a virologist. And I spoke to Dr. Philip Legace-Wiens and he is a medical microbiologist in Manitoba. Here's what he said.

SOUNDCLIP

You can conceive a scenario where a virus that was a natural virus that was found in a human in one was being studied in the lab to determine what its genetic signature was. Then a vial of that somehow went out back into the environment. But I think it's important to point out that it would have naturally been in the environment to begin with, for it to have been leaked from the lab. So I don't- even if it had happened, I don't think it would have contributed substantially to this epidemic because it was already in humans and spreading from human to human.

MG: So this is a widespread theory. What about the notion that this virus might have been intentionally created in a lab? Is there any science that speaks to that?

ANDREA BELLEMARE: No. So and what scientists are saying is that the evidence is overwhelming, that it came from nature. And it's interesting you said that, because even just before our interview came across, this statement actually from The Lancet saying that, you know, they're very critical of misinformation being spread around that, you know, I spoke to a scientist who had been involved in looking at the genome, asked after it had been sequenced, and he said there was no evidence. And if there were evidence, we would see it. And we just don't see it.

MG: It's difficult, damian was hinting at this, the speed at which these stories spread means that it is difficult to keep a lid on them once they're out there, isn't it?

ANDREA BELLEMARE: Yes, absolutely. And I think that really gets at the point of how difficult it would to try to, you know, create a law that would monitor that. I mean, obviously there are some things that we would know that would just be obvious, some of the more obvious cures like garlic or honey or, you know, [unintelligible] your face. I mean, those those are pretty obvious and might be easier to talk about. But this has been, I think, unprecedented for us. And I was speaking to Christina Tartaglia. She's with the International fact-checking Network at Poynter. As you said, this has just been overwhelming for fact checkers and the speed at which this information comes out is just something that we've never seen before.

MG: Andrea, we'll speak again. Thank you.

ANDREA BELLEMARE: Thanks, Matt.

MG: Andrew Bellemare is a reporter with CBC is disinformation unit. The CBC News is next. And then we're going to talk about throwing the gates open. Fresh air in a public park might be exactly what you need right now. It's been a long winter. It continues in some parts of this country. Other parts are seeing spring. And you might think I need to get outside and stretch my legs. That is being discouraged, even prohibited, in some cities. And yet there is a real fight across this country around the politics of public space and keeping those public spaces like parks open. We'll talk more about how this is playing out here and abroad. Coming up in about six minutes time, I Matt Galloway. This is an extended edition of The Current on CBC Radio One. We'll be right back. Stay with us.

Open spaces

Guests: Zeynep Tufekci, Ashleigh Tuite

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

[Music: Theme]

MG: Still to come, they've been called the incubators of disease inside the fight to shut down the wet markets. That's coming up in our next half hour. But first, Oh, to be Where the People are, think that's how the song goes?

[Music: Theme]

MG: We have been told. Get out there and enjoy the parks. Actually, wait. Don't do that. Or maybe it depends. It seems that that all rides on where you happen to be in this country. The rules vary. For example, here's Ed Jager, director of visitor experiences for Parks Canada, explaining their coast-to-coast Park lockdown.

SOUNDCLIP

Park candidates suspended all services and vehicle access by visitors than all facilities are closed until further notice. And we've really done that because we are doing our part in terms of protecting the health and safety of Canadians and our visitors and members of the park candidate team. And a lot of our decisions are based on helping people who potentially might want to come visit our places make the right decision and stay home.

MG: That seems fairly definitive. Meanwhile, in Vancouver, beautiful seaside Stanley Park remains open to visitors. This is park board manager Malcolm Bromley.

SOUNDCLIP

The most notable thing that we did was to close the park to particular traffic and make it just for cyclists, walkers and joggers, because it gives a lot more space for people to use the roadways to space out. You know, what we realise is that in Vancouver, half of the population lives in very dense buildings and nobody has a backyard. People are needing to get outside and exercise. The medical officer of health said it's very healthy for people, both their physical health and mental health to go outside.

MG: So open as usual, or should parks be a no go zone? Zeynep Tufekci teaches at the University of North Carolina, also writes for The Atlantic, and her most recent piece is headlined Keep the Parks Open. Zeynep, good morning.

ZEYNEP TUFEKCI: Good morning to you.

MG: What do you make of what's going on across this country in Canada? There are different rules depending on where you happen to be. As you heard, some parks open, some closed. What do you make of that?

ZEYNEP TUFEKCI: Well, the evidence is very much for keeping parks open as long as it's done sensibly that we don't create like a constant like situation where it's too crowded for many reasons for health, for immunity, for mental health, for battling this pandemic, which is going to take a long while. But I think what's happening is that as the potential for hospitals getting overwhelmed loomed, a lot of officials wanted to do something. And it was kind of early in the game and we weren't clear about everything. So there's been a reflexive shutdown of things like parks, which is understandable at first because, you know, we're kind of panicking and it feels like doing something. But if you look at how the virus is transmitted, if you look at how long this is going to take, it's clear that it's crucial for people to have access to exercise and outdoors. I mean, if nothing else, to keep their immune system up, exercise them outdoors. And fresh air and sun are great for that. It just has to be done on their this new reality where we have to manage. If it's too congested, we might need to limit the number of people per hour. We need to sort of have visual signs so that people can keep in no sort of their six feet distance from other people and all those sensible things. In fact, if anything, they're easier to do in parks where there's more space, because if you don't give people an outlet, what ends up happening is they crowd into sidewalks, which is not healthy, and they need to get out and do something. And in a lot of places, we're seeing sometimes grocery shopping just to get out of the house and indoors is definitely unhealthy.

MG: As you understand it, what's the health argument for getting out to a park?

ZEYNEP TUFEKCI: Well, so if you look at previous studies in 1918, influenza pandemic outdoors was so healthy that they had hospitals out there because of ventilation and the sunshine is harder for viruses compared to the indoors. And the other argument that's very important is that outdoors and fresh air and exercise boosts your immune system. The vitamin D is synthesized from being outdoors, just sort of having the clarity of mental health and less stress, the very well known booster of immune system. And to fight a pandemic, what more do you need then, your immune system to be up and strong? And third, a lot of people are under a lot of stress. It's a very difficult time. People are in a pressure cooker. They're facing job loss, they're facing anxiety. They've lost their routines. So it's a mental health pressure cooker, too. You can not have maybe a year, maybe two year long fight with a pandemic where you ignore the mental health crisis of this issue. And sometimes people really need to just get a change of scenery somewhere where they can lower their stress and parks outdoors again. Matt, insensibly, I mean, nobody's advocating let's go to a concert outdoors.

MG: I think one of the reasons why these rules are in place is because people may not be acting sensibly that spring has arrived and people are out in the parks and they're gathering together and they're sitting together on a bike and having a picnic or they're playing basketball or what have you. And that's why the rules are in place. So how much you put a lot of trust in people to to follow these rules?

ZEYNEP TUFEKCI: Well, there are a couple of things we can do. One. We've got voluntary compliance. Anyway, it's a pandemic. We're not going to have like the sort of authoritarian top down ordering of people around. Because what you do when you just say the people having a picnic and you see it a lot with younger people, they're kind of not always following our social distancing guidelines. But when you close the park, what you did is you just close your eyes to what's actually happening. You know, you managed to get the photo off the newspaper. But they might just be gathering indoors someplace else. And if they're going together and I agree, they should not. We should try to do our best to convince young people to socially distance as much as possible. But if they're going to break the rules somewhere outdoors, you know, there's a five of them where the ventilation distributes the virus is a much better thing to do. It's a form of harm reduction. And again, I think we should appeal to them. We should try to convince them. We should try to explain to them, even though they think they're, you know, immortal and immune, because young people are kind of hard to convince for these things. So then gathering outdoors to me is just we get to see it and they're doing it in the least, least way possible. He goes outdoors. It's harder for the virus.

MG: In the Atlantic piece, you talked a little bit about some of the steps that you could take to kind of keep parks and public spaces open to keep them safe. What would be one or two of those steps?

ZEYNEP TUFEKCI: So I think you could absolutely limit gathering's to either existing family household units or put a cap on it like five. Right. So just it's gotta be a small number. The other things you can absolutely do are limit congestion. The way we do with traffic, for example, you can say only household whose street number is order even can go to the park on a particular day or people whose birth month is this or just as a household. You can have counters the way we do in museums. And you can just have a little automatic counter and say this park can safely accommodate, let's say, a thousand people and close it for those two hours to those thousand people and one to two hours are up and say, all right, if you've been here the last two hours, time to go out. Depends on what the numbers are. You could have visual guidelines. I've seen bikers bike with this pool noodles that are exactly six feet long. Because, look, I understand sometimes people break the rules, but then breaking those door rule rules in a sidewalk, in a grocery store, indoors is worse for all of us. So we should try to announce and convince and make it possible. We could have like these pieces of cloth. People are supposed to bring in when they have their picnic, which is perfectly fine, they can sit down. We don't have to be always moving, but put these six feet cloth around them in all directions and their neighbours would know. Let's you know, this is how far we're going to be and everybody could have their six feet. There's so many ways we manage congestion in traffic. We have traffic lights. We have all these things we do for other congested things. And right now, outdoors is a crucial, crucial mental health, physical health and stress reduction outlet, especially like you heard the Vancouver. It's true in many cities, people don't have these yards. They're just cooped inside. And we're gonna have mental health crises, domestic violence crises. We're going to have all sorts of other things. This is not just two weeks. If it was just two weeks, I would say, all right, let's shut everything down because we can get through two weeks of anything, but we're gonna be in this for months.

MG: And that's why people have turned to your article to find out more about what they might do. It's good to speak with you about this. Thank you.

ZEYNEP TUFEKCI: Thank you.

MG: Zeynep Tufekci is an assistant professor at the University of North Carolina, writes about technology and society for The Atlantic magazine, where she wrote a piece about keeping the parks open. Gil Penalosa has been listening into this. Toronto based city planner, founder of 880 Cities. It's a non-profit that advocates for more public spaces in cities. He's a world urban parks ambassador. Gil, good morning to you.

GIL PENALOSA: Good morning, Matt.

MG: Do you believe that there should be a push to keep the parks open?

GIL PENALOSA: Oh, no doubt. I think that is very, very important to keep parks as well as streets open and for health, for health. I think everything we should do now the priority has to be mental and physical health. And we hear almost unanimous by medical health officers. That is good for people to go out and walk and be outdoors, maybe 30 minutes, maybe one hour a day. What we don't see unanimous is allowing these to be done safely.

MG: Tell me a little bit about you've been behind the push to close some streets during this period to traffic, opening them up to pedestrians. What's the idea behind that?

GIL PENALOSA: Well, there's two different things. One is for walking and one is for cycling. For walking is short area. For example, if in the commercial areas, let's say in Bloor West Toronto or any city across- and by the way, this is the same for cities across Canada and within their cities of three million people or cities or 30,000 people. We have the same issues for health and so on. When we are on the main street of a small town of 30,000 or we are on a commercial area of a big city, the sidewalk is not wide enough for people to keep that to me the distance. At the same time, people are lining up in front of the grocery stores and LCBOs and pharmacies. And when people are lining, that is very hard. So you take a lane, you don't have to close the whole street. Many streets are four lanes, so you just closed two lanes, the parking lane and you're not even taking out the lane for moving cars. Take out a parking and you will double this side of the sidewalk and then people are going to be able to go to their groceries, okoro this pharmacy and keep the two meter distance. So that is one. The second one, which is what Oakland is doing, is creating low streets. What is the low street that in the neighbourhood streets do not allow traffic. Only allow the traffic of the people that live on those streets. All of the neighbourhoods, streets are safer for children and adults and everybody to walk or bike keeping two meet a physical fitness test. And then Oakland, by the way, they did 25 percent of their streets, one out of force within Oakland, and they did it overnight. Is cheap, it's inexpensive, it's doable. And it's proven that people do not [unintelliglbe] people do not agglomerate. And so on.

MG: The medical officer health for the city of Toronto, Eileen Davila, rejected the idea of that in the city, saying that if you open the streets to pedestrians, you create a destination for people to gather. That's that's the opposite of what you're encouraging people to do in a pandemic. Would you stay home? What do you make of what she said?

GIL PENALOSA: Well, I admire her, but I think she's totally wrong because I think she's just following instructions for her boss, the mayor. The mayor, before the crisis, during the crisis, and now maybe after is totally cars, cars, cars.

MG: So, sorry. Just to be clear, you don't think that the medical officer of health for the city of Toronto is thinking for herself and saying that this would be a bad idea?

GIL PENALOSA: [Uninteligible]? I don't think so. What about the other thing is she can easily see what has happened is not about theory. If you look at Oakland, 25 percent of the streets and people are not gathering. There is many cities that are doing this, not only here in Canada. Mayor Brown in Brampton is doing it, in Edmonton, in Vancouver, in Victoria, B.C., in Halifax. So he's not only in Copenhagen, not right here across Canada. Cities are doing this and is not increasing the [unintelligible]. And also, there are more streets that you do these slow streets and the more parks that you open, the fewer people that are going to be driving because there's going to be a lot more space. We've got thousands and thousands of essential workers going to grocery stores and pharmacies and hospitals and so on and they are just terrified of public transit because they think public transit may not be clean enough. Right. This is a time to do corridor's cycling course. So if we just get a few East West with and a few North-South street and take away the right lane, take away a lane and then create a network. Unfortunately for walking, it was one neighbourhood at a time or one commercial area time. On [unintelliglbey], you need connectivity.

MG: What about the guidance skill that's coming? And I apologize for interrupting. We're just short of time, but the guidance that's coming from public health saying short term pain for long term gain. You need to stay home. This isn't the time to go out for a walk or for a run or for a bike ride. That if you want to flatten the curve, if you want to ensure that hospitals aren't overwhelmed. And that's what we hear from this frontline health workers, you just have to stay home.

GIL PENALOSA: Well, public health is sending contradictory message because on the one hand, Eileen says people need to be active and it's good 30 minutes or one hour of physical activity at the same time, she's saying do not touch the streets. And we are choosing our cars over people walking. So it is a mixed message. But if you take a look also at the national level. Dr. Theresa, her message is very clear. People do work. Be physically active for mental health and for physical health also. People who now we know that this is not going to be about one or two weeks. One of the things that crises in the transition. The physical isolation is going to be at least till the end of the year. Maybe they will be next year. Until there is a safe vaccination there is going to be physical distancing. So we need to whack and move from here. We cannot choose cars over people.

MG: Gil Penalosa. It's good to speak with you about this. Thank you.

GIL PENALOSA: Thank you.

MG: Gil Penalosa, Toronto based city planner and the founder of 880 Cities. It's an organisation that advocates for more public spaces in cities. And as you heard, he is also calling for the parks to remain open, but also streets in some ways to be turned over to pedestrians and cyclists in removing some space for cars while people are being encouraged to stay home. The question of how to open those public spaces and how open they should be weighs heavily on public health experts who are trapping, tracking this pandemic and trying to ensure that its spread is as slow as possible. Ashleigh Tuite is an infectious disease epidemiologist at the Dalla Lanna School of Public Health in Toronto. Ashleigh, good morning to you.

ASHLEIGH TUITE: Good morning.

MG: Knowing what you know, how sympathetic are you to people who want to be able to get outside and be in places like public parks in the midst of this pandemic?

ASHLEIGH TUITE: I am incredibly sympathetic. I mean, as a citizen and as somebody who's been through a very long winter and starting to see this sunshine and feeling a bit of spring fever, I understand that the desire to want to be outside. And I understand the desire to want to make use of the public spaces that we have.

MG: But?

ASHLEIGH TUITE: But...

MG: I could just sense that was coming.

ASHLEIGH TUITE: The but is you know, right now we're we're in the midst of a pandemic. We are trying to do whatever we can to try and flatten the curve. And I think, you know, I can sort of speak to what's been happening in Ontario. And I think, you know, early on, we tried to be a little bit less prescriptive in terms of the public spaces. You know, we gave messaging around discouraging people to go to parks and, you know, to keep their distance. And it was clear that, you know, it wasn't, you know, a lot of people were cooperating and doing the best that they could, but not everybody was complying. And so I think we came down a little bit with a hammer in terms of saying blanket, we're going to discourage people from going to parks and we're going to have these prohibitions. And I understand that it's frustrating. And I think some of the messaging is a little bit confusing because we are hearing get outside, get, you know, get some exercise, relieves your stress. But, you know, the reality is, is that we're the early days of understanding how to control this disease. And I think that given that situation, it makes sense right now. And I don't necessarily think that we're going to be having these rules in place for indefinitely. But I think as an initial measure, it makes sense right now.

MG: We've talked a lot about this, but I think it's worth going back over. Just briefly, what do we know about how this virus could spread in public outdoor spaces?

ASHLEIGH TUITE: So, I mean, I think the biggest challenge with COVID-19 is that we know that there are a lot of people who are mildly symptomatic and potentially asymptomatic. So no symptoms at all to appear to be transmitting disease. So when you're in a public space you have large numbers of people we've seen in other countries that are out there. There's an association between these mass gatherings and large congregations of people and large outbreaks and large chains of transmission happening. And the fact that people may not be feeling ill is problematic because you may not think that you're infectious to other people, but you are. And if you're in a public space and you're touching, for example, if you're on a playground or if you're playing sports and you're coming into close contact with people, those all represent potential transmission events.

MG: Is it also important to speak, and you've kind of hinted at that just in terms of where Ontario is, to speak about and understand where we are on the epidemic curve, that people are talking about this now and people have been moving towards the idea of flattening that curve or planking that curve, but that we're not there just yet.

ASHLEIGH TUITE: Exactly. And, you know, I get it. It feels like we've already been in this for a long time. But the reality is we're not through this. We're still, we're not quite sure where we are on this epidemic curve that we think we're possibly at or near the peak, but we still have the whole other side of that epidemic curve to go down. So, over the coming weeks and months where we're going to be starting to talk about how do we get back to a less, I guess, restrictive measures in in our population, including opening up parks and thinking about how do we enjoyed this summer while trying prevent transmission. But it's going to be very dependent on where we are in terms of controlling the pandemic.

MG: I guess what's confusing to people and we heard this from Zanta, but also from from Gill is, is that there's mixed messaging that we hear some things from some medical officers of health, different things from others. I mean, there's all the dust up in Ottawa in the last couple of days about whether you should have a beer with your neighbours in the driveway. And then that was walked back and said, yes, you can do that, but just be reasonable about it. Do you understand the confusion that people might understand in terms of they don't know what they can and can't do? And it's not just kids going out and wondering whether they can walk six feet away from their friends. It's whether all of us can can participate in some slim degree of normal life.

ASHLEIGH TUITE: Yes, absolutely, and I get it, too. I actually was thinking yesterday, you know, in Toronto we have the waste wizard where you can put, if you want to throw something out and you don't know if it goes in recycling or if it goes in your garbage. And I was wishing that there is something like that for for this.

MG: A pandemic wizard.

ASHLEIGH TUITE: Yes. am I allowed to do this. Am I allowed to do that because it's confusing. And it's not it's not always clear. I mean, I think sort of my go to thought process is, if I were infected right now, how would I behave? And I think that that's a good way to sort of gauge what you should and shouldn't be doing. But I, agree, the messaging is confusing.

MG: The other part of this is the mental health strain that people are feeling right now. And there are concerns around physical violence where people might be trapped in a home and they need to be able to get out. There's also just we've been in this, to your point, it feels like it's been for a long time. And that weighs on people. And people need to get a bit of fresh air. How do you weigh the risk of contagion with the mental health and physical health benefits of being outside and getting a better, fresher.

ASHLEIGH TUITE: I mean, I think everybody has a unique situation and it's really hard to give up a blanket prescription in terms of how to do this. People who have backyards and who are able to take advantage of that, can sort of alleviate the pressure on other people who don't have that opportunity as a way to get outside. I think we can get a side. We can go for walks, go for runs. It's really about thinking about how to do it in a way that preserves your physical space and make sure that you're not putting others at risk.

MG: Do you expect it's spring in some parts of this country and feels like spring in other parts of the country? Do you expect this debate to heat up as the weather warms up?

ASHLEIGH TUITE: Oh, absolutely, I think it's going to- it's starting to feel like baseball weather and it's swimming weather as well. So I think it's going to be interesting to see how we navigate this. And, you know, it's going to be complicated because it's going to depend on where we are on the epidemic curve. And it's also going to be as a society figuring out what that right balance is between ensuring that people, physical and mental health needs are met along with the risks associated with the pandemic.

MG: Feeling stir crazy yourself?

ASHLEIGH TUITE: Oh, yes absolutely.

MG: It's important to acknowledge that. I think in the midst of all of this. Ashleigh, it's good to speak with you. Thank you.

ASHLEIGH TUITE: Thank you.

MG: Ashley Tuite is an infectious disease epidemiologist at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health in Toronto. Thoughts on this welcome. How do we figure out how to thread that needle and make sure that people can get out and get a bit of fresh air and clear their heads without, to Ashley's point, spreading the virus. You can let us know on the Web site, cbc.ca/thecurrent and click on the contact link. Coming up in about 90 seconds, some believe that they are the source of this pandemic. Now there is a push to ban so-called wet markets in China and around the world. Talk further about that coming up. I'm Matt Galloway. This is The Current on CBC Radio One. We'll be right back.

Wet markets, Richard Lewis

Guests: Kerry Bowman, Ning Dai, Shawn Yuan, Richard Lewis

MG: I Matt Galloway you're listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

[Noise]

MG: Picture this you're in a large open air market, full of stalls packed with food and people, including this guy.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: All this shrimp. Little fish. Hello?

VOICE 2: Hello.

VOICE 1: Prawns, ha?

VOICE 3: Big big prawns.

MG: This is your tour guide, Steve Owens. He points to a row of tubs full of live fish and then starts walking to a different section.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: This is the meat section, guys. Drain's here. Beautiful, great big leg of pork there. Look at that.

MG: This is a so-called wet market, and the one you're walking through is in Kunming, China. They exist right around the world. And right now these markets are catching blame for this pandemic. Many people believe that COVID-19, began in a complex like this one in Wuhan, China. As markets have also been blamed as a probable source for SaaS and avian flu, here's the Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison.

SOUNDCLIP

We need to protect the world against potential sources of outbreaks of these types of viruses. It's happened too many times.

MG: Scott Morrison is calling for a ban on wet markets, and he's not the only one. The United States top infectious disease specialist Anthony Fauci agrees. That proposal, though, may be impossible and may also have huge ripple effects on China. Shawn Yuan is a freelance journalist based in Chengdu, China, where the wet markets have already opened back up. Shawn, hello.

SHAWN YUAN: Hi, Matt.

MG: Just quickly describe what a wet market is and what it's like to be in there.

SHAWN YUAN: So I think for general public, especially people who are [unintelligible] right now, they tend to think with markets in some markets who are so exotic wildlife animals and stuff like that. But for the majority of the wet markets in China, it's not the case. So, for example, in Chengdu, if you walk into a wet market, normally you would say you seek fresh vegetables and then you see fresh meat as well. And then in some rare occasions, you might see of the animals, for example, poachers like chicken, duck and rabbits, which is part of the cuisine in Sichuan. But overall, the vast majority of the wet markets, so fresh festivals and food that's already being processed or the meat has already been slaughtere.

MG: These markets have been in the spotlight since the emergence of the coronavirus. They were initially shuttered in China. Now they're starting to reopen. What's the mood like? Has anything changed in those markets since the reopening?

SHAWN YUAN: I wouldn't say that the odds the pandemic actually changed must be about the opinions people have towards wet markets. Of course, the number of people going to the wet markets is much, much lower than previous street, especially given the fact that there are a lot more market markets opening up in different neighbourhoods and people will go to supermarkets to get their food and vegetables. But for a lot of people, they would still go to markets because food is cheaper and the food is considered fresher as well. And that's reason why I think people still go to these places, even though there tend to be a blame on wet markets when it comes to the spread of COVID-19.

MG: Is your sense that the vendors in the markets are aware of that blame that's being thrown their way. Do they have a sense as to how people are talking about these markets elsewhere in the world?

SHAWN YUAN: Oh, yeah, absolutely. You know, when I went to the market a couple days ago, I was asking people how they felt about this whole discussion on when markets. And they were telling me that because people tend to be more cautious right now, especially those markets who have loved animals being sold, those markets do not have a lot of customers now. But in terms of the markets that only have vegetables or that the meat has already been slaughtered and they were put on put on the stand to be sold, those places, I think the vendors are definitely more at ease about the whole discussion about where market there's been.

MG: And we heard this calls from a number of people, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, the top infectious disease specialist in the United States, to shut these markets down for good. Are people there worried about that possibility?

SHAWN YUAN: I don't think so because I don't think that's possible, given it is such an important part of the cruising culture in China, for example, growing up in China. And I would go to these markets pretty much every week with my parents. And then I think it still happens pretty frequently with people on. It is such an important part of the culture and people go to those places to get fresh food. And as I told you earlier, the food and vegetables, they are a much, much cheaper than those compared to the supermarkets. So I don't think it's plausible for the government to completely shut down the wet market. So I don't think there would be any tangible fear over the shutdown of the market.

MG: And people generally aren't concerned about the markets themselves. I mean, again, outside of Asia, there's a lot of concern. Maybe that's around the misconceptions as you started out by talking about. But those shoppers who are there, who who have gone for generations, they're not concerned about what's happening there.

SHAWN YUAN: It absolutely depends on whether they are loved animals sold in our market, because if the market is only selling vegetables and and meat, then probably they'll be fine. But if this market is selling, for example, let's chicken or ducks waiting to be slaughtered and then those markets would definitely have a much harder time. And for this specific case, for the off [unintelligible] seafood market, which is suspect to be a to be the origin of place of the coronavirus where they actually sell wildlife animals and those places definitely will be shut down. And for the vendors who share the same market with this people who are selling what I like animals. Of course, they would be concerned as well.

MG: Shawn, good to talk to you about this. Thank you.

SHAWN YUAN: Thank you.

MG: John, you on freelance journalist, he's based in Chengdu, China. The suspected origin of Cove at 19 is that wet market that Shawn was talking about in Suhan, China. Countless visitors have passed through that market, including, it turns out, the bioethicist Kerry Bowman. He teaches at the University of Toronto's Dalla Lana School of Public Health. Kerry, good morning to you.

KERRY BOWMAN: Good morning, Matt.

MG: What did you see when you went through that market?

KERRY BOWMAN: Well, I saw a lot. You know, I was there purposely to look at the disease risk because I do a lot of environmental work and that's the very purpose I was there. And we counted 56 species. Two thirds of those species were wild. And then one third was domestic, in very close proximity to each other. Clearly, clearly stressed. You know, very, very concerning. You know, in 2003, there was a wildlife ban and it only lasted three months. And so it all came back. You know, what I would say is focussing on wet markets, and Sean alluded to this, is a huge distraction. I mean, the question is wildlife sales, which does not happen only in in wet markets. It can, you know, in the opposite of a wet market is a dry market or a supermarket. And a wet market is essentially a farmer's market, except in Canada farmer's markets are very expensive. There, they're not. And so, you know, that's an important distinction. But here's the thing is that the wildlife trade in China, a huge amount of it is farmed wildlife. So you've got a multi billion dollar annual trade in rural areas of China in which people are raising and breeding over 200 different species of wildlife. And it has been part of a larger economic strategy of the People's Republic of China to elevate, you know, the economic lives of the people of rural China. So you've got these massive farms with huge amounts of wildlife that have temporarily been shut down. But to my knowledge, that wildlife has not, you know. And what do you do with it, you don't want to kill all these.

MG: And what are the species that we're talking about? I mean, what did you see in the market, for example?

KERRY BOWMAN: Well, I saw species that your dear listeners may not be familiar with, things like Ben Tarong, pangolin, bamboo rats, palm civet, owls. You know, a lot of these types of things, turtles, snakes, those types of things. But remember, those are also now being farmed. And here's the thing. A lot of wildlife sales in China is online, are done online through platforms. So the larger context is this is not just about China. There is wildlife markets all over the world. And if we look to Africa and bushmeat trade, this is where Ebola came from. And long ago, like probably 1920s, this is the original crossover of HIV into human populations. So, you know, framing this is simply a China problem in a wet market problem is really not accurate.

MG: How would you go about banning that global wildlife trade then?

KERRY BOWMAN: Yes. You know, we need we need everywhere. And, you know, the wildlife trade absolutely affects Canada. We have all sorts of illegal wildlife trade that passes through our borders regularly, blocks for food and other purposes. So this is a global problem. It would likely and there is already, you know, there is already one one one big piece of global legislation, but it's not focussed on global health. It has very few teeth and it's not enforced very well. We'd really need, what we really don't have at a time like this is the global architecture to do it. Definitely W.H.O. or United Nations is the way we would have to move forward on this. And a very scary thing with this pandemic is how little global cooperation there is. Everyone's on their own. But if we do not deal with this, this will come back. And it's not just wildlife itself. It's the degrading of the ecosystems, the incredible biodiversity loss that we have. And climate change.

MG: Can you do that? And can you can you have a ban like that without stopping on the cultural practices and traditions of individual countries?

KERRY BOWMAN: Well, here's the thing. If the short answer is probably not. And in China, you're looking at about a 5000 year tradition of consumption of wildlife. And, you know, we all consumes wildlife historically. But here's what's even more concerning. If you looked at somewhere like Central Africa, you've got issues of food security if you simply ban these things. People have no form, there's no supermarkets at all in many areas of central Africa. So bushmeat is how people get their protein. You may have to look species specific and you may have to absolutely control it in a lot of other ways. It's not going to be easy. But I tell you, if we roll back the way we did after SARS, we will be hit again. And next time it could be worse. There's no question about it.

MG: Because as you mentioned, I mean, the wildlife ban was put in place in China after SARS, but then lifted, what, three months later?

KERRY BOWMAN: Yes. Yes, three months it lasted. And so, you know, a huge problem. The good news, I think it's when China decides they're going to do something they can do. They can move heaven and earth in ways that many countries cannot. And I think China has also had enough. And I really do hope, as we endlessly talk about this pandemic at ending, what lessons will be learned. But this is a global threat. And it is tied to a degraded environment. This is an environmental cause and it's not just the wildlife.

MG: You mentioned the issue of food security. We're going to pick up on that right now. Kerry, thank you as always.

MG: Welcome. KErry Bowman teaches bioethics and global health at the University of Toronto. At least 60 lawmakers in the United States are calling for wet markets to be banned in China. That's not counting the scientists and the politicians internationally who have asked for live markets to be shut down. Ning Dai is a researcher who has studied the relationship between wet markets and Chinese society. He's working on something called the Hungry Cities Partnership, a project investigating that issue of food security that Kerry Bowman mentioned, Ning Dai. Good morning to you.

NING DAI: Morning, Matt.

MG: Why are wet markets so important for the supply of fresh food for families in China? Shawn was hinting at that in describing the market that he was visiting. What else do you know about that?

NING DAI: Yes. So in general, wet markets in China, particularly Chinese cities, are the primary food source. So I've been doing research with the Hungry Cities Partnership, and our research finds that in the Chinese city, Nanjing, 93 percent of urban residents would buy food from wet markets. And over three quarters of them would buy food from wet markets at least five times a week.

MG: Culturally, how important are they? I mean, is that about tradition or is it about convenience?

NING DAI: So a bit of both people visit wet markets more so than if you had a supermarket, because the food that where market, it's fresher, it's more affordable. And also it's easier to access.

MG: Is there an element of class or status that is at play here as well? Just in terms of who would rely on a wet market?

NING DAI: Well, our research finds that there, wet markets it's really that the plate foreveryone make it really, you know, the class might be a factor because the food at where market is most affordable and so that low income households can also buy fresh food at a wet market. But also another element is that when markets are really fresh, so and the Chinese eaters really value the freshness of food. So what market is the way to go for many households. And also where markets are a social space in China, that many shoppers who visit the with markets regularly, but not just go there to buy food, they also socialize with the vendors, those other shoppers that visit the market at same time.

MG: And so there have been these calls from around the world. We heard the Australian prime minister, we heard Dr. Anthony Fauci in the United States saying shut these wet markets down. If the Chinese government wanted to, could it shut down all the wet markets in China?

NING DAI: I don't think that's feasible, and I think it's important to know that to ban or to shut down wet markets were really severely undermined the food security in many Chinese cities. And also it would threaten the livelihood of tens of thousands of vendors in this markets.

MG: Could talk about the food security piece first. What would that do if the Chinese government said they're all closed. You need to go to the grocery store and buy your food. What would that mean for food security in China?

NING DAI: I think that wet markets they they really, in terms of supplying food for consumers that are really the major essential keys in this for the infrastructure. If wet markets are shut down, yes, people could go to supermarkets. People could have other ways of buying food, probably from online. But that's not really feasible. That's too hypothetical because the as I said, most people still buy food from wet market and wet markets are most prevalent and most affordable source of food in Chinese cities.

MG: What about the economic impact? You mentioned the vendors who would then be thrown out of work there. What would that mean for those vendors?

NING DAI: Yes. So tens of thousands of vendors working the wet markets. So that's the difference between the wet markets and the supermarkets. So instead of manage it like a company in the wet markets, it's mostly brought in by independent vendors who each have their own booths and then they decide what food they want to shelf. And they decide a price as well. So these vendors really, they rely on these employments and their families rely on these employment. And shutting down the wet markets will force them out of livelihoods.

MG: In the search to find the origin of the coronavirus. A lot of scientists are pointing to this one seafood market, the Hunan Seafood Market and Wuhan. But you've said that that market isn't quite like other wet markets, even in wuhan. What's different about that one?

NING DAI: Yes. So that particular market is another typical wet market. A typical wet market would supply food to families and households. But that particular market is actually a wholesale market and which means that in most cities sells food to restaurants and hotels, a very large volume. So there's that difference.

MG: Is part of this about the terms that get thrown around? I mean, wet market ends up being a bit of a catchall term and people think that they're talking about a live animal market. Do we have to reframe what we're actually speaking about and the language that we're using here?

NING DAI: Yes, I believe that's necessary to clarify what type of markets we're talking about, because not all wet markets are the same. And in general, the wet markets in China that day, they don't trade wildlife.

MG: So what's the solution to this then? If people are very concerned not just about the spread of this coronavirus, but as Kerry Bowman was saying, when it comes to the live animal trade, you have other viruses in past that have appeared in viruses. Perhaps that in future will appear. What's the solution to this?

NING DAI: I think that it's important to recognise the risk of wildlife consumption. And as a matter of fact, China just passed the new law that will ban all wild land animal consumption. So I think that's a good call to prevent the pandemic like this from happening again. But we need to watch closely to see how the law will be enforced.

MG: Well, and given the fact that to Kerry's point, this is part of a cultural tradition, not just in China, but around the world, is it likely that even if the Chinese government says there's a ban on wildlife consumption, that that would be followed?

NING DAI: So what in terms of that, I think that the fourth quarter in China is very diverse. And it's not like in China, every person has a craving for wild wildlife, animal meat. Actually, as a matter of fact, that most Chinese consumers in their day-To-Day life, they don't consume at wildlife animal at all and and meat they buy from the wet market is usually the conventional farmed animal meat.

MG: Ning Dai, it's good to speak with you. Thank you.

NING DAI: It's my pleasure.

MG: Ning Dai is a Phd candidate at the University of Waterloo. Also a wet market and food security researcher who joined me from Toronto.

[Music]

MG: This is the current on CBC Radio One extended edition of the program, my name's Matt Galloway, Tom Power is the host of Q. Hello, Tom.

TOM POWER: Matt, I'm not here to make you jealous. I'm not here to make a jealous. I think I got to tell you something.

MG: Okay.

TP: All right. That's it. I don't want you to make it green with envy. But I had perhaps the greatest gorm a pandemic dinner last night.

MG: Do tell.

TP: Not one, but two boiled hotdogs. That's right, Matt. Things are going pretty well here at the old power house.

MG: We have reached that stage of the pandemic where the hot dogs are thawing in the sink.

TP: A hundred percent. And, you know, it will soon be hitting the place where I won't even cook them. Are you a Westworld fan?

MG: Like the TV show?

SHAWN YUAN: No the actual theme park. Yes. TV show.

MG: I'm about on average about 12 or 13 years behind on my TV consumption, so I'll get to it eventually. But by that time it'll be in the in the rear-view mirror. Tell us about it for people like me who've never seen it.

TP: I can't wait for you to find out how the Waltons and it's going to be great. For those who've never seen it. The show is about a dystopian technologically advanced future where humans and androids exist side by side. So that is just kind of like driving a Tesla. But Richard J. Lewis is the director and executive producer of Westworld. I talk to him about the existential themes of Westworld, how they tie into a global crisis like the one we're in. And I really enjoy talking to him because you think a guy who makes television a film about dystopia versions of technology would have a different relationship with his phone and his Apple Watch. He has a lot to say about how we're using our devices at a time like this. Take a listen.

SOUNDCLIP

TP: Hi, Richard.

RICHARD LEWIS: Hello, Tom.

TP: I want to talk about Westworld for a second. I know I've seen a lot of people reach out to me specifically to say, hey, you know, I want to get into this show. You know, where do I start? And we don't typically do this, Richard, in our interviews. But I thought given the time that it is and given who I'm speaking to, it might be it might be interesting to do it for someone who wants to jump into season three. Is that even possible? What would they have to know?

RICHARD LEWIS: Let me say this at the outset. There's a certain aesthetic quality to the show that is innately watchable. So you can actually watch the design, the world building and the beauty of the show without any narrative background. We'll start with that. Then I think you watch the character interactions and little by little you'll piece those together. I mean, ultimately, it's a very simple story about someone who wants to conquer a world. And that's Dolores. And then someone trying to stop her from doing that. That's Ciroc and aided by Mave. So I do believe that it's a fairly user friendly situation, given the, you know, the scope and all the fun cotton candy about watching this thing.

TP: It's amazing, even though it has become sort of an escapism for people to watch this during this time. I wonder if you're seeing it differently during this time.

RICHARD LEWIS: I'm seeing a lot of science fiction and futurism differently. I mean, I feel like we're in the Black Mirror episode, to be honest with you, but it's reality. So it's not you know, I mean, my wife always talks is referring to The Handmaid's Tale now in terms of the way, you know, the country being ravaged by disease and environmental disaster and things like that. I think in terms of of of Westworld, it's quite pathetic. I think Jonah and Lisa, really, you know, we're thinking about what are some of the scenarios that would unfold if man and this man continues to kind of explore and delve into these higher technologies and separation of wealth and power. And we look at we look at the future that we've set up in season three. And we see people wearing masks and we see self-driving cars. We see kind of a lack of contact, a kind of a sterile or more sterile environment. I'm you know, it's disconcerting for me to watch science fiction right now, especially this stuff where we see things go wrong, because that's what makes for good science fiction. I think when things started to fall off the rails and go all pear-shaped. So I don't know, I'm I'm more apt to watch, you know, Mary Tyler Moore Show.

TP: I think those Westworld, even before the coronavirus pandemic, reached a lot of people in a really interesting way, because in some way the show is about the extremes we will go to or some people will go to for power and for pleasure. I do see those themes playing out in a world right now as well.

RICHARD LEWIS: Sure. Especially given the administration that we're under in the United States. I definitely see those things, those things playing out. You know, when Crighton originally wrote the movie back in 1973, Michael [unintelliglbe] Jurassic Park, as you know, he was essentially dealing with many of those those kinds of things like, you know, what happens when we push it too far. We want to we want to keep going and see what happens, but we're not willing to take the responsibility of, you know, the outcomes. And I think this is a real warning. You know, science fiction is meant to be a warning. This is it. And now we're in a reality where we have to really kind of look at ourselves, look at the world we've created. Take responsibility for the world we've created and move from there.

TP: Has being a part of Westworld changed your relationship with technology?

RICHARD LEWIS: I think that's great because that's really one of our central themes. It's like man versus machine. You know, what is our relationship with technology and how far will we go? I recently- I mean, the best way to answer this is to just kind of say no. I could, I recently got a new car that has a semi-autonomous driving system. You know, I don't know if you've experienced any of that where that lane assist and it'll slow down. And I I've you know, little by little, much to the dismay of my wife and kids. They're like, Dad, put your hands on the wheel trying to experiment with it, Tom, and trying to figure out, you know, is this thing really going to work? And I think not. I think that I'm still too much of a control freak. And and I think that's that speaks to another theme of Westworld, which is the idea of control and freewill and destiny. And how much control do we really have over things, you know? And I think now we've seen the answer is not very much, you know, given the circumstance of today.

TP: What are you looking forward to doing the most once the world returns to normal.

RICHARD LEWIS: Hugging people, which may change. You know, the power of the hug is, you know, it's that I find that that kind of also very disconcerting that, you know, there is such a bomb and such and, you know, it's such an effective way to to to quell anxiety when you give someone a hug and such such a such a great communication device, maybe hugs will be allowed, maybe hand-shaking won't. I don't know. But am I looking forward to hugging the people I love.

TP: Richard, thanks so much for your time.

RICHARD LEWIS: Appreciate it, Tom. Thank you.

MG: Tom Powers conversation with Richard J. Lewis, the executive director of the TV show Westworld. CBC News is next, and then in about six minutes, British Columbia recorded Canada's first death from colvard 19. Now it has this country's highest rate of recovery. I'll speak with the B.C. Premier John Horgan, about the approach in that province to this virus. What they've done right, what they still need from the federal government. And when people in British Columbia might be able to start getting back to life as normal, that's on its way. My name's Matt Galloway. This is an extended edition of The Current on Radio One. Stay with us.

Elder Care, John Horgan

Guests: Marlene Perrin, John Horgan

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

[Music: Theme]

MG: Still to come, British Columbia's premier John Horgan on how his province is handling this pandemic. But first, your stories about aging loved ones.

[Music: Theme]

MG: We have heard troubling stories of separations and struggles, tales of survival as well. All week we've been talking about how this pandemic is affecting the elderly and especially those living in Long-Term Care Homes, hard hit with clusters of infected residents and a disproportionate number of deaths. Many of you have written in with your own stories. Trish Graham is a retired registered nurse and a family therapist in Peterborough. And Trish writes, My husband and the love of my life was placed in long term care at Pote Hope Extend to care last August. I want to counter the incredibly horrific and sad stories from Montreal with this one. The staff here are wonderful. This is not to suggest that any of this has been easy. Through the cruel lens of Alzheimer's, Karl still wonders why he can't come home. And it's heartbreaking. However, I am more thankful than I'm able to express for the amazing staff who care for these residents. We are lucky, and I know that my take is this: The vast majority of the grossly underpaid caregivers within the long term care system are doing the very best they can to care for our dear ones, especially in this time of pandemic. That's from Trish Graham in Peterborough. Marlene Perrin wrote from Manitoba about how difficult it is coping with restrictions on visits. Marlene wrote: We need to keep our seniors safe and healthy, but that includes their mental health. Currently, both my mum and dad are in her small care home in small town Manitoba. We thought we'd call Marlene to tell us more. She's on the line. Marlene, good morning.

MARLENE PERRIN: Good morning, Matt.

MG: Thanks for writing. Tell me a bit about your parents.

MARLENE PERRIN: My parents were put in a personal care home at the beginning of December of 2019. They were unfortunately quarantined for six days, right around Christmas as the first. Just, you know, regular kind of flu hits. But of course, in the last well, I guess it's been over a month. Nobody has been able to to visit at the care home. And they are understandably, you know, there's some dementia in both my parents. So they are, almost every phone call, I think it's sinking in now, but almost every phone call we have to kind of review about, you know, this COVID virus and why none of their family members are coming to see them. And they're understandably, you know, upset because that's all they have to look for right now, is visits from family.

MG: It's gonna be hard on you, too.

MARLENE PERRIN: It's certainly hard on all of their family. Yeah, for sure.

MG: What are you going to do today?

MARLENE PERRIN: I'm going to see them. I'm going to go sit with my lawn chair. I'm going to sit outside their window, outside their personal care home room and talk with them on the phone. Last time I did that, I don't think my mum was able to make the connection between me standing outside the window and talking to her on the phone at the same time. I'm hoping that goes, you know, a little more smoothly today.

MG: How long is it going to take for you to get from where you live to where they live?

MARLENE PERRIN: I'm an hour and a half away, so it's about an hour and a half drive there.

MG: And that I mean, they're family. Your mum and dad. That's worth it for your three hour round trip.

MARLENE PERRIN: It is. For sure it is. And that's. Like I say, you know, we've not everybody in my family is. Well, nobody is able to visit right now. And so that's all we have to do.

MG: We have been talking about the importance, obviously, of protecting seniors from this coronavirus and that in those long term care homes and residences that that it can really take hold if people are protected. And that in part is why those restrictions are there. But as you said in your letter, those protections need to include their mental health. What do you think the consequences of keeping family members out of long term care homes are?

MARLENE PERRIN: Well, you know, Matt, I mean. I have nothing but praise and admiration for the for all the workers in my parents care home. They do a fabulous job in a really, really difficult, hard situation. I'm just wondering if we're missing a piece when we don't consider the role that mental health plays in seniors or in all of our well-being. Physical and mental health are linked. I know we like to think of them as separate things in our own minds perhaps, and in our health care system. But we know they are inextricably linked. And I think I have really struggled with, lately, thinking that their physical safety should supersede everything else. Do we need to choose physical health over mental health or is there a way in our care homes to take both things into consideration? Because I don't know that it's realistic to think that we'll be able to shut seniors off completely from the world for like this isn't weeks. This will be months with no loved ones around. At a time when many of them are, you know, suffering some mental decline, some cognitive difficulties, and not have them lose their will to live. That's a real danger, I think, and something that obviously concerns me and my family and many, many families across across Canada and across the world.

MG: What do you think your mum and dad need now?

MARLENE PERRIN: Well, I don't know, all they're living for is, you know, visits from their family. That can't happen, obviously, right now. But I liked what your guest the other day, I think a few days ago you had somebody on who who posed the question of whether, you know, one thing we could do, could we could we appoint one family member, one designated family member who was educated, of course, on, you know, PPE and how to how to gown and mask and all that and have them. You know, be the designated visitor. So at least, you know, one family member or one loved one could visit at the very least. I think that would be- I mean, we do have lots of people, staff coming and going and obviously they have to be there. But I think the importance of having a family member. come and go is perhaps being overlooked in the in this pandemic.

MG: When you head down to to see your parents today, what will you try to say to your mum and dad?

MARLENE PERRIN: Oh, we'll talk about, you know, the dangers of this virus and how it's affecting affecting us globally. I'm a teacher and I'm not able to teach right now as many people aren't being able to, you know, to work. And just how everybody is doing and our family and what they're doing inside the care home. And my mum has a birthday coming up next week. So I'm sure we'll talk about what a memorable birthday this will be.

MG: I really appreciate you writing. And it's great to talk to you. And I wish you a safe trip down. And I hope the visit goes well.

MARLENE PERRIN: Thanks so much, Matt.

MG: Take care of yourself. Marleen parent lives in Martin, Manitoba. Her parents moved into a long term care facility in December. We received mail from a number of you who are worried about your parents. Caroline McDevitt is in Lower Queensberry, New Brunswick. Her mother is 96 years old and has dementia. She lives in an assisted living facility. And Carol Ann wrote about her mum: Her life is terrible. She was around in the Second World War in Glasgow, Scotland, and remembers the bombing and gas masks. But this is so much worse for her. She doesn't know where she is. She doesn't know anyone around her. She doesn't really understand what's going on. She doesn't remember how to use the phone. And if I'm able to get through, she mostly hangs up because she can't hear me properly. In her mind, she is completely alone and has been abandoned because she hasn't seen me in a long time. It breaks my heart when she must be going through. All I can do is send her cards, which I've been doing every day, just a cheering handmade card with a simple message. I love you. If you would like to add your voice to the conversation about elder care and some of the issues coming up in light of this pandemic. Visit our Web site. We'd love to hear from you. This is a story and a conversation going right across the country. You can reach us at cbc.ca/thecurrent. Click on the contact link. Our email address is there. There are other ways to send a message as well. And we've been talking about this all week long. And you can hear some of the conversations that we have had on a special podcast. You can find that on our Web site. And wherever you get your podcasts, go to cbc.ca/thecurrent. This is The Current on CBC Radio One. My name's Matt Galloway.

[Music]

SOUNDCLIP

We have a few days to go and Dr. Henry is overseeing that project. I believe that people have cause for genuine celebration and a pat on the back collectively and virtually, I should say, for the work that we've done together to flatten the curve.

MG: Cause for genuine celebration. When was the last time you heard that from a political leader who is talking about the pandemic? There it is. John Horgan, premier, British Columbia, a couple of days ago looking ahead to today. Today is when the province will update its projections on the spread of COVIF-19. What does this all mean? Who better to ask than the premier of British Columbia himself? John Horgan, premier, good morning.

JOHN HORGAN: Morning, Matt.

MG: We just heard you tell British Columbians that you would have some good news today. What is it?

JOHN HORGAN: Well, Dr. Henry will be issuing our updated modelling on the state of play with respect to the outbreak of COVID-19 here in British Columbia. And it is cause for celebration in as much as we have started to flatten the curve here. You know British Columbia was early on to this piece, largely because of the better weather we have here in January, February. But we identified our first case in January. And from that point on, we've been focussing on encouraging people to self distance, encouraging people who were not feeling well to self isolate, all of the issues that now we've become familiar mantra for Canadians. We in British Columbia started early on, and it's a testament to the resilience of the people in British Columbia that we adopted Dr Henry's advice. And today she'll be showing us some modelling that sees us heading in the right direction. We're far from out of the woods mouth, but after many, many weeks of uncertainty and unease, I think it's positive to see the line going in the right direction. We've seen a decline in the growth of cases. We've seen a reduction in the number of people hospitalized. Regrettably, deaths still continue largely with the ageing population, but not exclusively. And we need to stay the course. But I felt after reviewing Dr Henry's work and she'll be delivering it today. I thought it was important that British Columbians take some hope from that.

MG: You've said that in the not too distant future, these are your words. I think we'll be in a good place. The public, to your point, has been committed to this. People have stayed inside. People have stayed home to try to flatten that curve. What are the conversations that you're having in your government now about beginning to open things back up?

JOHN HORGAN: Well, from that from the beginning, we adopted a cross government approach to this, obviously. Minister Dickson, Dr. Henry are driving the science, making British Columbians and Canadians aware of the situation here on a daily basis. We were the first jurisdiction to begin the daily briefings, which are now part and parcel, I think, of Canadian life as is the current everyday people can anticipate hearing from the federal government and provincial governors across the country. And for us, we've been focussing on trying to get to that place where we can come out from underneath this. We are not there yet. We have more work to do. People have to stay focussed on the objective, which is to flatten the curve and eliminate the outbreak of the disease. But we also have to start thinking about how we can ease back into a sense of normalcy. So we've been working with the private sector, labour, non-profit organizations, indigenous groups to look at how we can phase ourselves in. We're aided in that map by the level of cooperation across the country between premiers, between the federal and provincial governments. We've been overstepping each other in some cases. So we were very concerned about the lack of capacity at the international airport in Vancouver to meet new comers are returning British Columbians to ensure they understood isolation and what we in BC had been doing for many, many weeks. The federal government is now with us on that, but we had to kick start that. And that's was not with acrimony. It was just about there's a gap. We're going to fill it. And that's been happening right across the country, working cooperatively with Jason Kenney, the premier of Alberta, who had surplus PPE, sending it to provinces that were short. It's that type of behaviour, I think, that's kept us all in in good stand.

MG: I want to talk about that collaboration in a moment. But specifically for British Columbia, you'll have people who are listening who want to know if you're promising, you know, that you can be in a good place in the not too distant future. What are you looking at specifically? Give us some hints as to what if you're trying to open things up? What might come first?

JOHN HORGAN: Well, first of all, we didn't completely shut down our economy. There are sectors, obviously, were designated as essential services and you look at provinces across the country have quite long lists of services that are considered to be essential. We wanted to make sure that workplaces were safe and that we worked with the what we call the WorkSafe B.C. or the workers compensation board with public health officials to try and designate sector by sector what types of activity were appropriate to take place under the the isolation and social distancing rules that we put in place. And so we've been building on that. My minister of education is working with stakeholders to prepare for the gradual reintroduction of normalcy. And I think that's happening across the country. We're not unique in that regard.

MG: Could you imagine schools opening up before the end of the year?

JOHN HORGAN: I can imagine that my health minister is working with stakeholders to get to that place. And after what we've been through collectively across the country, but particularly here in B.C., it's not going to be a snap of fingers, maths. And I don't think anyone expects that now. But there needs to be hope that we are not here forever. Bonnie says regularly. This is for now, not forever. And we're starting to look at how we come through this. Other jurisdictions are doing it as well. Some with criticism, some not across the globe. Germany seems to be in a good place in Europe. Who knows what the United States will come up with. But we in British Columbia are working cooperatively across sectors, labour, employers to find the way to get back to normal. And I think that's what British Columbians expect of us.

MG: You mentioned the United States and we saw yesterday the U.S. president give guidelines for what has to happen for states to reopen. You've talked and been very critical about the federal government and its action, or lack thereof initially on closing the border. How concerned are you about things opening up in the United States before you make a move here in Canada, in British Columbia?

JOHN HORGAN: Well, we have a very good relationship with Washington state, Oregon, California, what's called the Cascadia corridor from Yukon all the way down to San Diego. The biggest initial outbreak in the United States was in Washington state. And that was an early indicator for us that the borders were going to be a problem. And some of the community transmission that we had in B.C. was a result of of workers who go across the border either to to work or to live on a regular basis. And so it was critical to us that we manage that more effectively than the federal government was able to early on. And again, there was no acrimony. It was we saw a problem, we filled it, and we're working cooperatively going forward. Similarly, we'll do that with Washington State. Governor Inslee, you may remember, was criticized by the federal government in the United States. But I think he's been doing a spectacular job under extraordinarily difficult circumstances. And because of our relationship with Washington, we're going to want to make sure that we have a seamless reintegration of our activities. But it will not be, again, the snapping the fingers. And I think we'll take our guidance from Governor Inslee rather than the federal government in the U.S. on these issues.

MG: So what would it take then for the border to be reopened? We know that there are conversations apparently happening between the federal government and government in Washington about this. And again, with the U.S. president making that move yesterday, what would it take to make you confident that that border should be reopened?

JOHN HORGAN: Well, again, I'm going to deal with Washington State and I appreciate it's typical Washington, D.C., Washington state. Mr. Trudeau, we'll deal with the federal government in Washington. We have a good relationship with our neighbours. The states have control over these their destiny. The border is an international border. But we can and should act appropriately for the in the best interests of our two jurisdictions. The state of B.C. will do that. What happens in Ottawa and Waashington is their own business.

MG: Is that what you mean when you say you're on your own timeline, that that's you you may not wait for, for example, the prime minister to to take action that you're going to act as the timeline in British Columbia dictates?

JOHN HORGAN: Well, I believe we need to have a sense of going forward together. Absolutely. And we've been establishing that through our regular conversations amongst premiers and amongst the two orders of government. But we're all in different places and we'll all acknowledge that if you had another premier on right now, the story would be exactly the same. The timeline in Saskatchewan will not be the same as this timeline in Quebec. And I don't believe we should wait or be pushed or juristiction should be pushed to action sooner than they need to. In the interests of their communities. And that's why I say we're on our own here. And I don't mean it in isolation. I mean that we'll be making decisions in the best interests of British Columbia, supported by the federal government. I'm confident of that.

MG: You and your colleagues were on a call with the prime minister last night. What can you tell us about that discussion?

JOHN HORGAN: Oh, well, again, I like to focus on problem solving. There are challenges across the country. They're different in every jurisdiction, every region. But the level of cooperation I've been involved in, I've been elected for 15 years. I worked in government in Ottawa and in Victoria. And to have the variety of different political perspectives and regional differences that exist in Canada today, all working together is quite extraordinary. And I celebrate that, as does so I think every leader across the country. There are complex and there are disagreements. There needs to be a more. I think coordinated effort on the announcements that come from the federal government, particularly the cost shared programs because different premiers are different provinces rather are in different places fiscally and how they can meet those costs shared expectations. And when the federal government announces a program that the public says, when do we start? And of course, it takes time for these things to work. And that's why it's so important we keep talking to each other and we're seeing positive results. And as they say, disagreement does not necessarily mean that we're going to be at odds with each other. It just means we disagree at a point in time and we're working through that. And I think that's the thing to celebrate in this unique situation, that that federalism appears to be working, not because we're drawing lines in the sand and saying, I'm not going to cross this. We're saying there's a line here, how do we work together to get around it? And I think Canadians should celebrate that as well.

MG: Much of the discussion right now is about what's happening in long term care homes. And of course, this was an issue in British Columbia Valley and still is now this morning. Also, we're seeing this across the country. These are provincially mandated in terms of the funding, but also the oversight. But there are calls on the federal government to have a greater role in this. What should the federal government and what role should the federal government have when it comes to long term care?

JOHN HORGAN: Well, one of the issues we were working on, particularly led by Manitoba over the past year and a half, is looking at the cost sharing arrangements when it comes to the health transfer, which is something that the federals collects the money, distributes it to provinces. We deliver health services. The challenges we have in health care in every jurisdiction are not about who's responsible for oversight or regulation. That's about do we have enough resources to provide services. And what this crisis has demonstrated quite graphically is that when it comes to seniors care right across the country, again, it's uneven depending on which jurisdiction you're in. There needs to be more resources because what helps seniors in their latter years, people what had people costs money. And so we need more resources from the federal government to deliver those services. We don't need more restrictions or regulations. We need more dollars so we can hire more people so they don't have to work in multiple locations, which was the cause of outbreak here in British Columbia earlier on. We've changed that. We're finding the additional resources so that we can ensure that that care aids and other health care workers are only designated to be in one location rather than multiple locations, and that didn't happen overnight. So, Matt, that's a result of declining resources coming from all the while. The health transfer used to be a cost shared program. Now it's vastly funded by provincial governments. So we need to rebalance that. And we've been trying to get that on the agenda for several years. And I think now more than ever, we need to address that issue.

MG: Just finally, we have about a minute or so left. These have been difficult days, weeks, months for people right across this country. And I just wonder what your message would be to people who, to your point, need some degree of hope, something on the horizon that's going to tell them that this isn't going to go on forever?

JOHN HORGAN: Well, and I think that's why I was optimistic when I saw the first draft of the modelling is because there is hope, but we're not there yet. But I think as we continue to wrestle with the challenges that this virus and this pandemic are creating for families, for communities and for poor provinces and our entire country, we have to look at the success we've had collectively. And as I said in the clip you started with that we all need to pat ourselves on the back, because had British Columbians not embraced the notion laid out by Dr. Henry so ably that the only way we were going to come through this better off than when we went in. And if we follow these basic rules, we've been doing that and we're seeing results. And I think all Canadians need to take hope from that and continue that just to stay at home. If you don't have to be at work, if you can work from home, do so. Stay a safe distance from your neighbours and your friends and your family members, for that matter. Until we get to a place where we can safely say we're back to as normal as we're going to get in the short term, we need a vaccine, we need herd immunity. These things will take time. But we've got capable people. I look at the health officers across the country and how much respect there is for those individuals at this time. And I take heart from that as well.

MG: Premier, busy days for you. I appreciate some of your time this morning. Thank you.

JOHN HORGAN: No worries, Matt. Thanks.

MG: John Horgan is the premier of British Columbia. He was in Victoria. This is The Current on CBC Radio One.

Issa Rae

Guests: Issa Rae

MG: This is the Current on CBC Radio One. I'm Matt Galloway. Tom Power, good morning.

TP: Matt. How are you? How are you holding? You know, it's Friday.

MG: It's Friday. I was just going to say it's Friday. What are you going to do this weekend? Big plans for you?

TP: Oh, yes. Going to go, going to go on a road trip like in the top of the CNN tower. Oh, yes, that's me. It is take out Friday. I've been trying to get takeout on Friday.

MG: Really?

TP: Yes. I tried to break up the week. You know what I mean. You do anything special on Fridays, let the steam out?

MG: I fall asleep on the floor. I actually literally I fell asleep last Friday on the floor in front of the television and it was painful.

TP: Let me give you a little Segway here, man. You know what you could do with your weekend?

MG: What's that?

TP: Check up on HBO hit show Insecure.

MG: Big deal.

TP: You like that?

MG: It is a big deal.

TP: That's the broadcaster trick right there.

MG: That's a Segway.

TP: Thank you very much. Issa Rae is the creator and star of the show, Insecure. And I gotta tell you, I mean, you know as well as I do, I'm just kidding around. The show is pretty unbelievable.

MG: It is. Yes.

TP: She's pretty much grown up on screen joking about feeling awkward and out of place. Her show started in 2016 as an awkward black girl show. She's won a Peabody Award. She's been nominated for an Emmy and a Golden Globe. And it just entered its fourth season. She's been doing projects outside of the show. I spoke to her about her dark city Beneath the Beat, which is a documentary she co-produced. She is just one of the most engaging, smartest, funniest guests we have on Q. And anytime we get a chance to have her on, I'm always really excited about it. Take a listen to me and Issa Rae.

SOUNDCLIP

TP: Hi, Issa. How are you doing in the pandemic?

ISSA RAE: You know, surprisingly great because I'm a very routine based person and this has allowed me to get everything together and be productibe, like, that's all I've ever wanted.

TP: Can you tell me your routine?

ISSA RAE: On Monday. Wednesdays and Friday, those are my writing days. I get up early to work out and then dedicate time to all the[unintelligible]. On Tuesday and Thursday. It's my favourite interview work, so-called day weekend, can go either way. I try to [unintelliglbe] myself that most likely I'll still end up writing.

TP: Do you get any time to, like, eat chips and watch TV or anything like that?

ISSA RAE: Yes. Saturday.

TP: I loved your virtual party on Sunday night when you did the premiere of Insecure as someone sent me a text and they said, you know, Issa Rae is doing it, insecure black party. And I said, Oh yeah, what is that? And they sent me a picture of you just with a bottle of champagne in your mouth. Tell me [Both laught] tell me how that went.

ISSA RAE: It was fun. I had never gone Instagram live before, and it was it was like [unintlleigble] and I felt like I had to navigate guests and entertain. But it is very lonely because all you have are your comments and that is delayed. But just the act itself of people being excited about the premiere and sitting at home watching it's really, really good.

TP: I want to play a clip from the first episode of Season four. This is your character, also named Issa, asking her friend for advice.

SOUNDCLIP

ISSA: Hey, what if, just hypothetically, what if you met an amazing woman, amazing woman, out of the world with dating your ex, just hypothetically. Would you try to make it work or walk away?

FRIEND: I mean the heck for me. You know, she's in jail now. I find her. That was so right.

ISSA: See, I don't like, and paying bills.

TP: That's a totally hypothetical question from the new season of Insecure. When you know what, if you hit it off with your friend and you discover they're dating your ex. You tell me. I want to talk a little bit about friendship and how it relates to the new season of Insecure. You know, what was your vision for this new season of the show? What did you want to dig into?

ISSA RAE: The show at its core, has always been about Molly and Issa and their friendship and then developing as friends, but also individually. And I think the journey as they grow individually, as the people who they ultimately don't recognise is really intriguing to us in the writers room. When you have a history with a friend, you know the good and you know the bad. And sometimes when your friends are changing it's hard to recognise that they can change for the better. Where your used them in this specific path. And that can ultimately be damaging to the friendship.

TP: You know what? What I love about that, I got a bunch of questions I want to ask about that. But one is what I love about that is that I feel like so much of like our media, especially even now, explores love, of course. You know, love and romantic narratives, of course, like the narrative that's been part of our kind of collective narrative since the beginning of time. I feel like we don't explore friendships enough and I feel like we don't explore especially, you know, sports friendships with women and friendships between black women, but just friendships at all enough. Well, what is it that you find interesting? But the dynamics of friendships.

ISSA RAE: Friendships are so complicated, we almost take them for granted. You know, I think about The Friendship Break-Up that I've had over the years and they've happened more as I progressed into my late 20s and in my early thirties. And that's painful. You know, I probably would have never had my heart broken in relationship and never had my heart broken by a man. I've had my heart broken by me ending female friendships, justt because although forgive me. Like I imagined growing old with some of my female friends and some of my male friends, and they fall off of various things. They know that life happens or you may realise that you're going in a certain direction and your friendships don't necessarily support, that you outgrow friendships. And nobody really talks about those things in a way unless something that we felt like we had it devastated packable on this day.

TP: Tell me a little bit about this work you're doing for independent artists. So you did this new documentary called Dark City Beneath the Beat. Tell me about that.

ISSA RAE: Well, that is a documentary artist who I discovered on my own. The music on the show here, Alina, who's a music supervisor put me on to that music. And I've always been a fan. She's been featured in every season. And then she came to shadow our show this past season is typically have director shadows and we get to know her as a result. And that's it for that seems to be independently just on her own. She directed it a documentary about the Baltimore dance, and the Baltimore community.And it is phenomenal. You know that she get it completely on her own, is having no directing experience. And for a limited directing experience, I should say, it's incredible. And it was sort of America's Southwest. But, you know, unfortunately, it's not that I want to cancel, but we are seeing it with the right people. And I hope it finds a home to let other people see it. But that's kind of what we tend to do with our organisation, kind of creative that is about spotlighting and highlighting and helping emerging artists get a platform and to integrate into the industry.

TP: As someone who was once an emerging artist yourself, you know, kind of you and I've talked about this before, kind of scrambling and struggling to make space for yourself. What's your advice to independent and emerging artists who are stuck inside right now?

ISSA RAE: This is the best time to find the most creative way to showcase their work. For me, that's what it came down to, is this office and die down right now. And people are just hungry for content and the industry doesn't know how it's going to be delivered. So what better way to introduce yourself to a starving, confused industry by finding a new way to showcase for disagree?

TP: Issa Rae, thanks so much for your time.

ISSA RAE: Thank you so much, Tom, as always.

MG: Thom Power speaking with Issa Rae creator and star of the show Insecure. That we'll do it for the current for today and for this week. We wanted to end this week with a bit of joy. Earlier in the program, we broadcast The Current's very first virtual sing along with you, led by Toronto's Daveed Goldman and Nobu Adilmann. They hold a weekly drop in singing event called Choir. Choir. Choir. You each recorded your own part, which was lovely. Thank you for that. If we can't be together in person, maybe we can be together on the radio. And that was a great example of it. We'll leave you with that. I'm Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

[Choir Choir Choir audience compilation]

The Current Transcript for April 17, 2020

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

We won't let COVID-19 measures strip our freedoms away, says U.S. protester

Chinese community

Advertising, Disinformation

Open spaces

Wet markets, Richard Lewis

Elder Care, John Horgan

Issa Rae

Friday April 17, 2020 Full Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode