Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2020

The Current Transcript for November 13, 2020

Host: Matt Galloway

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

[fclip] " onerror="continue" />

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

Your Majesty, I think we have enough respect for one another person to ask ourselves some of the bigger questions, woman to woman.

MATT GALLOWAY: What are you doing this weekend? For many of us stuck at home is this pandemic drags on the new season of the Netflix drama. The Crown couldn't come soon enough in 30 minutes to look at the legacy of one of the key characters in season four, the loved and loathed former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Also this morning.

SOUNDCLIP

I know I was going to be exposed to racial remarks and slurs from not only players in the opposition, but from fans. But I just said they will never hurt you unless you let them.

MG: He was hockey's Jackie Robinson, the first black player in the NHL. In an hour, the great Willie O'Ree is here to talk about the price he paid for breaking the colour barrier on the ice. Also this morning, health reporter Andre Picard on alarming Covid numbers, accusations by that Ontario's premier ignored advice from his own public health agency and whether schools can actually remain open as the pandemic drags on. We begin, though, with our national affairs panel and questions about who's really in charge of Canada's Covid response and what could change. Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway. This is The Current.

[Music: Theme]

'Politics at play' more than ever as pandemic drags on in Canada, says reporter

Guests: Marieke Walsh, Jason Markusoff, Yudhvire Jaswal

SOUNDCLIP

We're seeing record spikes this morning across the country, so I urge the premiers and the mayors to please do the right thing, act now to protect public health.

MG: That was the prime minister on Tuesday calling on other levels of government to take action on Covid-19 and to ask for federal help if they need it. All week we've seen surging case counts, especially in the Toronto area and in the prairies, and a surging political debate about how to respond. Joining me now to talk about all of this and more is our national affairs panel. Marieke Walsh is a political reporter at the Globe and Mail. Jason Markusoff of is Alberta correspondent at MacLaine's. And Yudhvil Jaswal is group publisher at Y Media and host of South Asian Pulse. Good morning to you all.

MARIEKE WALSH: Good Morning.

MG: Marieke. Let's start with you, Prime Minister made some pretty pointed remarks on Tuesday. What did you take from them?

MARIEKE WALSH: What I took from them was actually what he didn't say. He did call on the provinces to act, but he did not lay out any kind of specifics in terms of what needs to be done now and where it needs to be done. And that leaves him and the provinces and territories still a lot of wiggle room. He put, you know, more lockdowns and shutdowns on the table, but he kind of floated it more, as, you know, an idea that science agrees is needed and the sooner the better. He stopped well short of saying, you know, where it needs to happen and to what extent it needs to happen.

MG: Yudhvir, what did you make of the prime minister's remarks in particular? How are they being received in Ontario, especially in the Covid hotspots around the greater Toronto area?

YUDHVIR JASWAL: You know, I think we all know and the leaders also know that we are at a crossroads right now whether Canada would go the way we've seen things happening in the U.S., Brazil, Russia and India or Canada would go Australia, New Zealand with numbers going this way. So I think at this point, that's what prime minister is referring to now that he has asked for help or do whatever you can. But let's try and stop this. But I agree there are not many specifics right now and how do we collectively deal with this. That's one thing which is missing.

MG: Jason, let's talk about what's happening in Alberta. New restrictions came in yesterday afternoon for the next couple of weeks. They involve indoor fitness and sports being closed, reduce operating hours for restaurants and bars. But those restaurants and bars still stay open. This comes in the wake of the urging by the prime minister on Tuesday for premiers and territory leaders and mayors to take stronger action. But it also comes in the wake of calls from doctors. More than 70 doctors signed this open letter calling for action. Do you think what Jason Kenney did will satisfy his critics?

JASON MARKUSOFF: It's you know, I think people will say it's a start. Doing more is always better than doing less, you know, both on a pandemic, public health perspective and a political perspective. Whether it's enough, you know, there are some there are going to be a lot of critics, a lot of voices who don't think it's going to do enough. Will it put it will actually put a dent? Will people's behaviour shift enough to put a dent into things? You know, that remains to be seen. Jason Kenney himself has been, you know, one of the most libertarian sounding leaders in the country. A lot of them are talking about the balance of economics versus public health. But he's been really talking about stressing the livelihood risk and even trying to sometimes downplay the public health risk compared to other other causes of death. But he's facing the hard reality that a lot of politicians are facing. All these are rising cost cutting, rising equitation, but the hospitals are straining in Alberta. We've doubled our number of people with Covid in the ICU since October 31st, since Halloween, and we're not even two weeks past Halloween. He's acknowledged that. And he's and so people are feeling the stress and all politicians are going to want to be seen as doing something in the face of this. And that's, I have to say, I think that's part of what Justin Trudeau is doing. He doesn't have the ability to apply these lockdowns or shutdowns. So he wants to be seen as nationally as being assertive on this and doing what he can do, which is, I guess, goading them and also saying I think that's the important other half of what Justin Trudeau said was what more can we do? He's the man with the chequebook on this. And if there are more economic measures, relief measures that premiums are going to want, he's expressed an openness to that.

MG: Marieke, why hasn't the federal government taken a firmer hand? Some other countries have done this. You have, you know, cases exploding in many parts of the country and people are saying this is a federal issue. This is no longer a provincial or municipal issue. This is a federal issue. So why hasn't the prime minister and his government taken stronger action?

MARIEKE WALSH: Yes, look, I mean, the thing to remember about Canada is that we can't even agree on whether and how to ship wine between provinces. So maybe we shouldn't be surprised that this is a problem right now. But Canada is so decentralised and we do have this Emergency Measures Act or the Emergencies Act that Ottawa could invoke to wrest some of the control over lockdown's overrules from the provinces. But that is so politically sensitive and untenable in so many parts of the country. We saw already from Ontario Premier Doug Ford yesterday the response from Ontario, which is, you know, not as sort of averse to federal invasions into provincial jurisdiction as, for example, Quebec would be.

MG: Well, let's hear what the premier said with premier of Ontario was asked about those emergency powers and whether the federal government could invoke them. Have a listen to what Doug Ford said yesterday.

SOUNDCLIP

I wouldn't go over too well, not just with me, with all 12 other premiers. And that's not their jurisdiction. We don't need the nanny state telling us what to do. We understand our provinces. And I'll tell you, he'd have a kick back like he's never seen from, not just me, from every single premier that just wouldn't fly. What I do believe in and we've been doing it. We work extremely well with the prime minister, with the deputy prime minister. All the ministers are in constant communication. That's the way you get things done.

MG: Marieke, continue on. Is that the fear that the prime minister has not just in Ontario but across the country?

MARIEKE WALSH: That is, I think, just a taste of what the prime minister would get if he did actually try and rest some of the controls from the province. You know, even the money that they have doled out so far comes with very few accountability measures to actually ensure it gets spent and how it gets spent. Ottawa gives the money to the provinces. And that's the one way street the provinces want. And the challenge for the prime minister is that as he sees these cases mount, he this is political, right. He needs to also ensure that the public is onside with believing that Ottawa has done everything it can. And he will have a different political calculation than each of the premiers. The feds, for example, the prime minister said this week, you know, we've done everything we can and we have put the programmes in place in order to make it easier for the provinces to make these tough decisions. And while they have promised these programmes, they're not actually all in place. The rent subsidy programme for businesses, which was very widely criticized in its first round, still isn't in place in the second round. And it's now two months that businesses have been having to pay rent without these federal support. So there are questions for the federal response at the same time that Ottawa is trying to put the pressure on the premiers to do more. They had that conversation last night. We'll hear from the prime minister this afternoon. But what I did hear from that talk that the prime minister had with the premiers is that it was stressful and it's tense.

MG: I want to bring you over in a moment. But just very briefly, Marike, does that change that calculus change in light of the news that came out in the Toronto Star the other day, that Doug Ford is under increasing pressure because apparently he ignored and his government ignored recommendations from his own public health office?

MARIEKE WALSH: Yes, I think that especially when you're looking at the political map for the federal liberals and when we know that the federal liberals are ready and willing to go to an election, that those things do matter. And I think that what we saw this week is that piece or that, quote unquote, Team Canada approach that people were lauding in the first wave of the pandemic, it could be separating a little bit more. There could be some more daylight between the premiers and the prime minister. And I think how much daylight he puts between himself and the premiers will be very indicative, not just of his political intentions and electoral intentions, but just how much risk he's willing to take in.

MG: Yudhvir Jaswal, what do we know about what's happening in Brampton and peel the areas outside of the city of Toronto where there are alarming case increases? The mayor of Brampton has been calling for a strategy that's less focussed on restaurants, more on where transmission is actually happening. What do we know about where that transmission is happening?

YUDHVIR JASWAL: When I asked Anthony Brown directly that being to is mentioning your name and he's talking about Brampton a lot more than he answered me on that interview, that, yes, there are a lot of frontline workers over here. You have a truck drivers in Brampton. You have many people who are working in the front line in hospitals. So many people are working at the airport and the taxi industry. So obviously it's challenging. And then regarding restaurant, he specifically mentioned that we're not seeing many cases coming from restaurants. Why shouldn't the restaurants rather, there are cases coming from other places like indoor settings in industrial processing. So let's target those areas.

MG: What do you see? A disconnect between what the province is offering and what the municipal health officials in Peel are are seeing on the ground?

YUDHVIR JASWAL: Well, yes, I think already there has been discussion going on and noticed on political as well with Antibes blaming that, yes, it has already been under four billion, has already been underfunded. And then I saw choose for NDP from Patrick Brown, the mayor, and he's been asking he says, I've been charging for an isolation centre for a long time now. He got one. He says, our testing centres we have behind, we had to get the facilities. The testing has to be done. So, yes, there is a disconnect.

MG: Jason, you raised the issue not just at the prime minister's comments around governments taking further action, but also that the chequebook would be there and that support would come from the federal government if those provinces and if the municipalities were asking for it. Have a listen to Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc. He was speaking yesterday on power and politics.

SOUNDCLIP

Provinces always want more money from the government of Canada, and that's not new. That probably goes back to Confederation. We have said in the context of the pandemic, we will do what is necessary for as long as is necessary to protect Canadians. And that includes, obviously, supporting provinces in terms of health measures, contact tracing, vaccine rollout. The important thing is that the provinces use the money that we agreed to, the 19 billion dollars in the safe restart agreement, plus the two billion for the safe return to school. That money be used in the best way possible as quickly as possible.

MG: Jason Markusoff, how well do you think those comments would be received by Jason Kenney?

JASON MARKUSOFF: I mean, he'll never, you know, shirk back from picking a big, you know, a fight with that with Ottawa when it's convenient, when it's available. That's always a very popular tactic to shore up support at home. The challenge with I mean, what's been talking about, I think going back to what Marieke said is that the big pressure point on shutdowns is going to be on businesses. And that's not that's that's more directly money that the federal government isn't supporting. We're hearing groups like the Federation for Independent Businesses talk about this time we want to be made whole. And that's going to, of course, mean getting their act together on the rent subsidy. That's going to mean somehow upping the wage subsidy. If what we're talking about, to really wrestle down something and have some sort of some family gatherings for Christmas or just, you know, just save our health systems and we might be talking about a severe full circuit breaker or a complete shutdown lock down. These businesses are going to want to be made whole in a way that a 75 percent wage subsidy might not do in a way that any, you know, slapdash or incomplete rent subsidies might not do. And that's going to be the money that if premiers start asking for support to support full lockdown's, if it actually comes to that, that's what's going to be needed. And that's a complex, long conversation that's not just going to be interprovincial jostling about what's been spent in this pocket with the Senate [unintelligible] pocket. That's going to just require a whole different thinking about what we're doing.

MG: Marieke, there are accusations that the Ontario government is sitting on something like six point seven billion dollars. And I guess that's in part what would Dominic LeBlanc was hinting at there. What's going on with that money?

MARIEKE WALSH: Well, I think that's one of the questions, I mean, one of the other things that the provinces agreed to when they got this, quote unquote, safe restart money from Ottawa was testing targets and meeting certain testing targets as aa really important part of the surveillance mechanism and tracking the virus and being able to get ahead of the virus. And none of the provinces have met those targets. So Canada had been targeting two hundred thousand tests per day and we're well short of that. So there are lots of questions about actually implementing and actually moving on things. And I think Dominic Loblaw, the point he's making in part is, you know, the money the provinces are now asking for in health care are about structural issues. Those are not issues that would meaningfully impact. Now, the response to Covid if we had higher Canada health transfer and there was a better health system capacity built up in the last 10 years, then yes, I think it would have a meaningful impact right now on the pandemic response. But, you know, we have what we have right now. And so changing the Canada health transfer, as Premier Doug Ford was talking about yesterday, is not going to change the response right now to the virus. And there is going to be a question at the provincial and the federal level of what's actually been implemented, what is promised versus what we're seeing at the federal level. There are just as many questions as at the provincial level.

MG: Yudhvir, you host a very popular radio programme, South Asian Pulse, what are your listeners what do people in your community want? This is politics. But in the midst of in the midst of a pandemic, what are people actually looking for?

YUDHVIR JASWAL: Very good question, actually. They just want this this virus to stop and cannot stop. Yes, it can. When we do our talk shows, we discuss other countries. Singapore has done that. South Korea has done this. Taiwan has done it. China has done it with them, has done it. And we could compare with Australia, Australia in terms of population, size and economy. We we can definitely confirm that this November there has been zero case. Absolute zero case in Australia. I mean, they even control the province of Victoria, Melbourne, and then they have there has decided to use distance at a [unintelligible]. I'm guessing they were discussing with you, Matt. Yes. This is this is this is no time for finger pointing or scoring any brownie points. I think we should have a national plan. And there is a national plan, a national theme, where you have the prime minister. We would have the deputy prime minister and a few of the federal leaders, and then you would have the premiers on board so that tomorrow that this is the deal which has provincial premiers and which has been moved from the federal government. And nobody could see that. Yes, you were wrong. I was right. So this is the plan that I think everybody needs right now.

MG: Marieke, are we seeing a politicization of the second wave? Were initially you saw public health officials front and centre and this and now there are a number of people who are saying the daylight is appearing between those public health officials and the political leaders.

MARIEKE WALSH: Yes, we're certainly seeing that in in places like Ontario. I think that we are seeing more politics at play. And I think that is in part because of the electoral calendars that we're seeing. I mean, we already saw three elections in Canada this fall, four if you include the by-election federally. So politics is becoming more a part of it because the pandemic and Covid-19 is becoming for better, for worse, mostly for worse, part of our daily lives. It's more normalized. And so there is a return, I think, more to politics that we didn't see in the spring because, you know, this was new. And I think because it was new, it was more scary. And part of the problem is that we have now kind of become numb or neutralised, desensitised to it. And, you know, you'd be making a really good point around the messaging. He said we're at a crossroads. And one of the things I've seen is that both politicians and medical officers of health and the chief medical officer have struggled to, I think, really make clear the urgency because the language is so similar to what we hear every day. It feels like the time to act is always now. And in part, that's true because there's no better day to act than today because you can't do it yesterday anymore. But I think that makes it really difficult for Canadians to see this urgency if the messaging is the same and at the same time so confusing. When you look at the GTA, for example, the different rules and the different regions. Well, those people are all served by very similar media outlets. Right. CBC Radio Metro Morning is serving Mississauga, Scarborough and Toronto, and the rules are different. And so that is so much more difficult.

MG: Jason, what about in Alberta in the last minute and a half that we have or so do you see a politicisation that perhaps was not evidence early on in this pandemic?

JASON MARKUSOFF: Yes, I think that the public the public mood is different than it was in March, building on what Marieke was saying. And I think this is the case across the country, that in the spring everybody was really worried about this and scared and people were willing to accept the shutdown. Right now, we have a situation where there are large swaths of people that are really ticked off and don't want restaurants to close because they want to still dine in. They want to go back to normal, restaurateurs and diners included. And then there are those who never in the first place would have been, you know, thought of going indoors to dine at a restaurant because their perception of Covid danger was still high even in the summer. So politicians are facing these mixed messages. But I do think that as we're seeing hospitals reach breaking points and case counts, reach alarming records in Manitoba, Alberta and pretty much every other province, not in the Atlantic bubble, that there could be a shift, a turning tide. I mean, we're even seeing today they're supposed to be some announcement by Premier Ford and his health minister for something today, too. So who knows if the political pressure is, in fact, coming to bear.

MG: It's great to speak with you all about this. Thank you very much. Marieke Walsh is a political reporter at the Globe and Mail. Jason Markusoff Alberta correspondent at MacLaine's and Yudhvil Jaswal is the group publisher at Wikimedia and host of South Asian Pulse. Coming up after your CBC News, we will talk about long term care homes continuing to be hit hard by covid-19 The Globe and Mail. US health columnist André Picard will be here for an update on what's being done. We'll talk about the alarming projections in Ontario and elsewhere. And can schools remain open in the midst of this pandemic? All things to be discussed coming up in about six minutes time. I'm Matt Galloway. This is The Current on CBC Radio One. Stay with us.

Andre Picard on COVID-19

Guests: Andre Picard

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

[Music: Theme]

MG: Still to come.

SOUNDCLIP

Mr. Chairman. Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen, I stand before you tonight in my Red Star chiffon evening gown. [Applause] My face softly made up and my fair hair gently waved [Laughter]. The Iron Lady of the Western world.

MG: Bringing the Iron Lady Margaret Thatcher into 2020. Plus, later on, Willie O'Ree reflects on his legacy as the first black professional hockey player. But first, provincial governments continue to grapple with outbreaks in long term care homes and beyond.

[Music: Theme]

MG: Well, as we were talking about before the news, provincial governments are taking the heat this week as cases of Covid-19 continue to rise. Long term care homes are being hit hard in Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario, with dozens of deaths over the last few weeks in Quebec. Hundreds of classrooms have been closed in the last two days because of infections. And Andre Picard is here once again to help us sort through some of this. Andre is the Global Mail's health columnist. Good morning.

ANDRE PICARD: Good morning.

MG: It was a grim day yesterday when it came to Covid News Ontario. Projecting to exceed something like 6000 daily cases by December have been surges in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba under lockdown. It's like, oh, to be in the Atlantic bubble. I think a lot of us dream of that situation there. What's your reading of what's going on right now? Why is this happening?

ANDRE PICARD: Well, we're going through this. I'm calling it a surging and urging phase. You know, the numbers are surging because we're not really having strong restrictions and we have all these politicians urging other people to do something but not really doing anything. So it's a very bad combination. The numbers are going up and there's not really a lot of action happening in response.

MG: Do you see a politicisation of Covid-19 measures? We we're talking about that with our national affairs panel.

ANDRE PICARD: Well, there's no question this has been political since day one. But I think what's happening now is kind of that solidarity - we use that word a lot in Quebec - that solidarity is breaking down. So we used to have the politicians listen to public health without question. And now there's a lot of pushback both ways. So as a lot of breakdowns in the agreements that we used to have even a couple of months ago.

MG: One of the things that I think is confusing to a lot of people, and we heard about this again in our national affairs panel, is the lack of clarity around what people are actually supposed to do. If you take a look at it, Ontario, you have cases surging. The city of Toronto is going to be opening some gyms today. But the mayor is also saying and his public health leaders are saying the same thing, which is stay home. What's the effect of all of that incoherent message?

ANDRE PICARD: Yes, it's very confusing. You know, I follow this stuff obsessively. And to be honest, I don't know what I'm supposed to be doing anymore. So it is really, really difficult. And it's resulting from a couple of things. One is nobody wants these massive broad lockdowns. So we're trying to do more focus lockdowns and we're trying to do as few measures as possible. And the combination is you don't know from almost from one neighbourhood to the next what's going on. So I think there needs to be some backing up and just some simplification of the message as we saw it with Manitoba's medical officer of health, sort of get angry about this and say, listen, you know, let's stop splitting hairs, just stay away from other people, you know. And I think that's almost the message we have to have. Limit your contacts as much as possible. Don't get caught up on the minutia of this because it doesn't matter.

MG: It was also revealed earlier this week by the Toronto Star that Ontario ignored its own public health agencies advice when it came to the thresholds for its Covid-19 restrictions, thresholds that are so high that it would be almost impossible to reach the lockdown phase. What do you make of what was revealed in the Star?

ANDRE PICARD: Well, if you're going to have public health people and you're going to ask for their advice, you should follow it if you're not going to follow it. Don't bother asking them. You know, I think Ontario, Alberta, these provinces have to be clear. If you want to make this strictly a political issue, which is your right as a politician, just say so. But don't- I think the worst thing about Ontario is the pretending. Oh, yes, we'd love your advice, but if we don't like it, we're going to ignore it. You can't do that. You either have to follow the advice or not. And I think, again, that's confusing the public because they're hearing these mixed messages. They're hearing, you know, you have an orange light or a yellow light when it should- when a month ago or two weeks ago, it was a red light. So you can't just keep shifting the goalposts and expect people to follow the rules because they don't know what the rules are anymore.

MG: What's the role for the federal government in this? The premier of Ontario is asked yesterday whether the federal government perhaps could step in, whether it's through emergency powers, whether it's through directly funding public health agencies in municipalities. And he said he doesn't want the nanny state to be involved in this. What's the role, do you think, of the federal government in in this urgent moment?

ANDRE PICARD: I think the role of the federal government, because of our constitutional makeup, the best they can do really is urge the provinces to get their act together, to have some sort of agreement. You know, this notion of bringing in the emergency act, as your panel said very eloquently, I think it's a non-starter for all kinds of reasons. The main one being Prime Minister Trudeau's father did the War Measures Act. And this has too many echoes. It's not going to happen. And it's probably not it wouldn't be particularly useful, I think, at this point. So I think what they have to do is just sort of sit down in a room and kind of agree to have more clarity in the rules around the country rather than every province having slightly different variations on the same theme.

MG: So if this continues to escalate, though, you don't expect a just watch me moment from Justin Trudeau?

ANDRE PICARD: Oh, absolutely not. I don't think that's his character and I don't think it would serve him well. Politically, it would just feed into the opposition's, you know, way of looking at things.

MG: Yesterday, the premier of Quebec, Francois Legault said that his government is considering closing schools because of Covid-19 infections. In Ontario. There are some school boards there are calling for a longer winter break. And the speculation is that this could happen across the country. What's happening in Quebec classrooms?

ANDRE PICARD: Well, there's about 1100 classrooms that are closed now, so there's been a lot of cases, especially in the last few days. About 20 percent of all cases in Quebec or in school. So there has to be some sort of action. And yesterday, the premier was kind of musing out loud, you know, maybe we'll extend the winter break. And that's kind of how Quebec is doing its politics. It launches this trial balloon, you know, sees what the reaction is in the media and the public. And then it either acts or it doesn't. So I expect we're going to get some extended winter break. But the winter break is still several weeks away, and we're going to have to watch closely what happens in schools until then.

MG: I think, I speak as a parent, I'll say with full disclosure. There is a lot of anxiety around whether schools will stay open. Do you think schools can stay open?

ANDRE PICARD: I think it depends. You know, we've talked about this many times. I think it depends what your priorities are. And I've said all along that- I think what's good about Quebec is Quebec is very clear. And the premier said it again yesterday, the last thing we're going to do is close schools. So it's a question of choices. What's important in society is that having children in school for their development, their education, allowing their parents to work, or is it to have restaurants and sporting clubs open and you have to make a choice. Quebec has made that choice clear. Ontario, the choice has been a little less clear. There's kind of wavering from one to- they want to kind of do everything and do nothing at the same time. So I think if they can stay open, but you have to recognise the price that will be paid with other parts of society and the price that will be paid by children. Yes, children are getting Covid, but we still are not seeing a lot of illness. So, again, these are choices and you just have to be honest and straightforward about them.

MG: Let's talk about long term care. How bad is the situation and long term care homes right now, as you understand it?

ANDRE PICARD: Well, it is quite grim, just, you know, we don't in Canada have great national numbers, but Justin Trudeau alone currently has more than 100 long term care homes with outbreaks, 52 deaths in the last three, four days that I've been able to track. So this has happened, as you mentioned, you know, Manitoba, Alberta, there are some huge outbreaks with dozens of people dying in single homes. So we're seeing a disturbing return to what happened in the spring. And unfortunately, it's not surprising because nothing has changed the underlying reasons that we had these disasters in our homes, lack of staffing, overcrowding, you know, just disdain for our elders. More generally, all of these things are still in place. So if nothing changes, there should be no surprise. The virus took advantage of first time is taking advantage again. And I think this is going to sadly get much worse again. We saw thousands of deaths in the spring, 6000-7000, and I think we're in the hundreds now and we're going to soon be in the thousands of deaths in the second wave.

MG: Just finally, why has nothing changed? I mean, this is an overused word in some ways in 2020. But there was a reckoning, I thought, when it came to how we as a society treat our elders. If we've come through that reckoning, why has nothing changed?

ANDRE PICARD: I think nothing's changed because these problems are so big. And so they've been around for decades. So staffing, you know, you can't just bring in thousands of people overnight. Quebec has promised to do it. They're training people. Other provinces have made big promises. But you really need a lot of people and you need different facilities and you need you don't just take the example of the three and four bedrooms. Everyone knows that those are not a good idea. But if you get rid of them, you get rid of 4000, 5000 spaces just in Ontario. So where do these people go? So they're not simple, easy solutions to these things. But still, there are some solutions and we're not taking them. So of reckoning, we talk about that in the long term, but in the short term, sadly, our elders haven't been a priority. They've just been forgotten once again. The approach has been, well, let's just lock them away and that'll be that. But when we lock them away, we lock them away and they die. And they die, not only of Covid, but of isolation.

MG: Andre, we'll talk again. In the meantime, it's always a pleasure to have you on the programme. Thank you.

ANDRE PICARD: Thank you.

MG: Andre Picard, The Globe Mail health columnist.

[Music]

'She believed she was always right': The polarizing legacy of Margaret Thatcher

Guests: June Purvis

MG: This is The Current on CBC Radio one, my name is Matt Galloway.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: Your Majesty, I think we have enough respect for one another person to ask ourselves some of the bigger questions, woman to woman. We are the same age, after all, really just six months between us.

VOICE 2: And who is the senior?

VOICE 1: I am.

VOICE 2: No.

MG: Oh my goodness. Are you watching the Netflix series The Crown? The fourth season begins this weekend. There is much buzz about the agony and the ecstasy of the House of Windsor as it moves into the 1980s. The scene we just heard was from the first meeting between Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and her majesty Queen Elizabeth, The Second playing the role of the Iron Lady X Files star Gillian Anderson, who spoke with Tom Power yesterday on Q.

SOUNDCLIP

I think you can understand how she became who she became and yet still disagree with a lot of the things that she might have done and yet at the same time be impressed by her brain or her work ethic or the fact that she was a woman of stature at that particular time. So, yeah, she's, she's, she's complicated.

MG: There are many people looking forward to seeing how the era known as Thatcherism will be depicted in the crown. Joining me to discuss the life and time and the legacy of Margaret Thatcher is June Purvis. She is an emeritus professor of women's and gender history of modern Britain at the University of Portsmouth in the UK, and the editor of the international journal Women's History Review, June Purvis. Hello.

JUNE PURVIS: Hello.

MG: What was it that made Margaret Thatcher so complicated?

JUNE PURVIS: Yes, well, she is a complicated woman. I think on the one hand you can say she was an outsider because of her class. She was a grocer's daughter who rose up to be prime minister. And she was also an outsider in terms of her gender being a woman and a very male dominated party. But she was no feminist, so she didn't push to women friendly policies, for example, into childcare or anything like that. And she didn't promote women into her cabinet. So she didn't pull women up and the way she had been done. So that is a positive for her being the first woman prime minister. But on the other hand, she was so divisive and a polarising figure in British politics.

MG: Here are two memorable moments that in some ways bookend her time in office. The first one, 1980, the second from 1990.

SOUNDCLIP

To those waiting with bated breath for that favourite media catch phrase, the U-turn, I have only one thing to say. U-turn if you want to. The lady's not for turning. All levels of income are better off than they were in 1979. So what's the honourable member is saying is that he would rather the poor were poorer, providing the rich were less rich. That way you will never create the wealth, [cross talk]. What a policy. Yes, he would rather have the poor poorer provided the rich are less richer. That is a liberal policy.

MG: June Purvis, what were some of the policies that made people have such strong feelings about Margaret Thatcher?

JUNE PURVIS: Well, what she tried to do when she came to power was to, amongst other things, was to roll back the state. She thought there was too much state provision, too many state benefits, et cetera, et cetera. So she privatised a lot of the state owned utilities, like gas and electricity. She put them on the stock market and people could buy shares and council housing that we had. You may call it social housing. People could buy their own. So they was less housing for people who needed it. She introduced student loans for higher education and she tried to control the unions. And I think it was the controlling of the unions and the closure of coal mines were - unions were very, very effective - was really the key things that most people found particularly abhorrent about her. Unemployment rose. Unemployment rose to over three million.

MG: She hasn't been in office for 30 years. How do people feel about her now? I mean, have those feelings, those strong feelings changed since she left office 30 years ago?

JUNE PURVIS: No, I don't think so. I think her legacy is still seen as being very divisive and polarising. And people either hate her or love her. But I think on our TV, TV screens, here in the U.K., we had pictures of policemen with helmets on and batons attacking miners in their own communities who were trying to defend, defend not only their jobs, but also a way of life. And I think people still find that quite shocking when it's shown. She was a conviction politician, Thatcher. She believed she was always right and that was her tremendous weakness, so that when she introduced a poll tax whereby every member in a household would be taxed rather than the House itself in terms of how many rooms it had, etc., that was her downfall. And there were riots and protests. And in the end, she was pushed out by her own cabinet.

MG: Do you see comparisons between her and Donald Trump? People see a direct line in some ways, just in terms of that she was loved and loathed, but also to your point that she believed that she was right all the time.

JUNE PURVIS: Yes. I mean, I despise Donald Trump's. Oh, I think she was slightly better than Trump, I think Trump is very unpredictable, erratic, nasty, brutish and riding on a tide of nationalism. I don't think Thatcher did, but I think she was very much the right wing of the Tory party. And she did push through some measures that needed to be undertaken. For example, the trade unions at that time were much too powerful before she came to office. We all had three day weeks here in the UK because there wasn't enough electricity, etc. And what she did introduce, they were secret ballots for union members so that they have to vote whether they went on strike rather than the leader of the union. Just saying, you know, we're all out on strike.

MG: You hinted at the beginning, there are people who who saw her as a role model for women and others who called her policies anti woman. How do you see her when it comes to gender?

JUNE PURVIS: Well, as I said, She is a problematic figure, I think, because feminists do not like her because she didn't introduce women friendly policies, she had a very confrontational style of leadership. She liked argument. She didn't like consensus in any way. But on the other hand, you know, she. She really didn't, I think, have compassion for British people, including women.

MG: Let's listen to another exchange between Queen Elizabeth, played by Olivia Colman and Margaret Thatcher, played by Gillian Anderson. This is from the new season of the Crown.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: My goal is to change this country from being dependent to self-reliant. And I think in that I am succeeding.

VOICE 2: Joblessness, recession, crises. It's a dangerous game to make enemies left, right and centre.

VOICE 1: Not if one is comfortable with having enemies.

VOICE 2: Are you?

VOICE 1: Oh, yes.

MG: Was she truly comfortable, Margaret Thatcher, was she truly comfortable with having enemies?

JUNE PURVIS: I think she was comfortable. I think she liked having enemies. She liked having confrontation. I mean, I always see her as a queen bee who likes to be surrounded by men and like to discuss and argue with them. She wasn't a leader who brought women with her. That's quite clear. And also it is rumoured that her and the queen never got on. And I'm pretty sure they didn't.

MG: Will you be watching the Crown when it premieres?

JUNE PURVIS: Yes, of course I will.

JUNE PURVIS: There's already a lot of discussion about it in the press and about how Olivia Colman, who plays the queen, the way her salute is, is too limp. Some of the military, is saying, you know, Olivia Colman should have held her hand up much more straight her arm and and not bend it over, bend over the hand. So we'll watch out for that when we finally see it on Sunday.

MG: I have the inside scoop on what I should be watching for it when I watch the Crown on Sunday, June. Thank you very much. It's great to talk to you.

JUNE PURVIS: And thank you for asking me.

MG: June Purvis, Emeritus Professor of Women's and gender history at Modern of Modern Britain, pardon me, at the University of Portsmouth in the United Kingdom, talking about the crown and the legacy of Margaret Thatcher, someone who she has studied extensively. The Iron Lady, as Margaret Thatcher was known, inspired a lot of protest during her time in office. Much of it was in music, from punk to ska. She was the perfect muse, perhaps even villain, for people like The Clash, Billy Bragg and the English Beat. This is the English beat and their nod to the prime minister. Stand down, Margaret.

SOUNDCLIP

Song]

MG: Friday is better already. English beat stand down, Margaret. Coming up after your regional update, Willie O'Ree made history more than 60 years ago as the first black player in the National Hockey League. In a moment, he reflects on that legacy and on the current state of political action in sport. I Matt Galloway this is The Current. Back in 90 seconds.

Willie O’Ree on breaking the colour line

Guest: Willie O’Ree

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

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: He says I could be the Jackie Robinson Iwaki of hockey, so I started playing with Phil and he taught me a lot of things to check and he says that you'll have to take a lot being the first colored player in any player league or in the National League. But I went along and I played as hard as I could, and that year I ended up with 22 goals. I was at about four weeks with a foot injury, but still helped me a lot.

VOICE 2: In terms of this business of being a Jackie Robinson of hockey, have you had any troubles?

VOICE 1: No, none. None that you could say that ws troubles. I've had a few years like that, but I guess all hockey players did.

VOICE 2: Yeah.

MG: That was Willie O'Ree being interviewed on Hockey Night in Canada way back in 1961. Like the great Brooklyn Dodger, Jackie Robinson, Willie O'Ree was also a pioneer for racial justice when he broke a colour line in major league sports. He tells his incredible story from playing on the frozen ponds of Fredericton to being named to the Hockey Hall of Fame in a new book called Willie The Game Changing Story of the NFL's First Black Player, Willie O'Ree. Good morning.

WILLIE O'REE: Good morning.

MG: What did you think about being compared to Jackie Robinson?

WILLIE O'REE: Well, I was very happy to be in the same category as Mr. Robinson. You know, he broke the colour barrier in 1947 with the Dodgers, and I broke it in half in 1958. The comparison is that, you know, apparently Jackie set goals for himself, as I did. And I knew that I'd be targeted being a black player. But I just wanted to concentrate on playing hockey. And I worked towards my goals and just stayed focussed on what I wanted to do.

MG: Tell me about the first time that you met Jackie Robinson.

WILLIE O'REE: I was 14 years of age. I was playing baseball in my hometown. We won the championship. The reward was that our team was going to be taken to New York City, The Empire State Building and all the tourist attractions went and saw Mr. Robinson play at Ebbets Field. After the game, I went down to the dugout and shook hands with them. We talked for probably five to seven minutes and I told them that I not only played baseball, but I played hockey. Mr. Robinson didn't realize that there was any black kids playing hockey at that time. And I said, yeah, there's a few of Mr. Robinson. So I shook hands with him. And, you know, he says whatever sport you play, he says, just work hard. There's no substitute for hard work. And then I met him again in 1962.

MG: Did he remember you in 62?

WILLIE O'REE: Yes, he did. The NAACP had a luncheon in Mr. Robinson's honour at one of the local hotels in North Hollywood. I received an invitation to the hockey club. When we arrived, the coach came over and said, Mr. Robinson, I'd like to introduce you to the local players, especially Willie O'Ree, newly acquired from the high level Canadiens, a team back east. And Mr. Robinson turned looked back and said, Willie O'Ree, he says, Aren't you the young man I met in Brooklyn? So he remembered me from 1949 to 1962. And I was I was in Arlington when he actually said that because he'd met that so many people over the years and he single me out and remembered me.

MG: What an amazing moment. Tell me a little bit about what life was like growing up black in Fredericton in the 1930s, in the 1940s?

WILLIE O'REE: Well, you know, I was I was just a young black player, a kid playing about six or seven different sports. Most of my friends were white, but it didn't seem to be a problem. We just went out and played it after elementary school and got into high school. I had a couple of racial remarks directed towards me from a couple of the white kids there, but it really didn't bother me. I knew the type of person I was, and my older brother, who was not only my brother, my mentor, he taught me a lot of things that I would need to know. And he said, you're going to be faced with racial slurs, racial remarks, but just let it go in one ear and out the other. It's as if they can't accept you for the individual that you are is just that, that's their problem, not yours.

MG: The city wasn't segregated, but there were, as you say, places that a black person wouldn't go. And one of them was the barber shop. Tell me about getting your haircut.

WILLIE O'REE: Well, it all started. I was living in 245 [unintelligible] street in the family, was about five miles from my house. And they were nice neighbours. And I asked Mr. McQuaid one time and just, you know, I just couldn't go in the barbershop [unintelligible] cutting my hair. And he said no. So I would go on his back porch and I'd get my haircut. And this went on for quite a while and I believe I was 15, 16. I was a teenager and I asked Mr. McQuaid, I said what do you think would happen if I went to a barber shop to get my haircut. Because there was no signs posted at the barber shop saying, you know, no colored people allowed for the barbershop. So he says, I don't know, it's never happened before. So I guess two or three weeks went by. And then I told Mr. McQuaid I was going to come into the shop. So I come into his shop and I could see people directing their looks towards me. So I sat down in one of the chairs and I said, I'm going to wait for Mr. McQuaid. And when he had finished with the gentleman that was in the chair, I got up and I went and sat the chair and, you know, I struck up a conversation with them right away because the room became really silent. And I just asked him how days gone and so on, so forth. And I got my hair cut and left. And that was the first time a black person had come into their barbershop and had their hair cut. And then I went in from then on.

MG: You're breaking barriers even at that age.

[Laughs] I guess.

MG: How important was hockey to you when you were a young boy, you describe it as being a kind of life force for you. What did you mean by it?

WILLIE O'REE: I was obsessed with playing. Well, you know, I started skating at the age of three and I started playing organised hockey at the age of five. And I had a rink in my backyard. We had a pretty, pretty good sized backyard. And my dad would flooded to scrape it off. And there was an instant rent and I would skate every day in the wintertime, much get to school. And so when I started playing organised hockey, I was just obsessed with planes and I was playing with my brother and he taught me he taught me a lot of things that I would need to know about the game. And then when I was 14, I decided I wanted to become a professional hockey player and I played it until I was 17. And then I played for the Quebec [unintelligible]. Next I went to Kitchener and I played with the team in the Montreal Canadiens and I was having a good year in Rosewarne when I had my unfortunate accident and I was struck in the right eye with the slapshot and ricocheted right in front of the net. And I lost 97 percent vision in my right eye, was taken to the hospital. Dr. Henderson, that's the surgeon, come into my recovery room after. And said, Mr. O'Ree, I'm sorry to inform you, is the impact of the puck completely shattered the retina in your right eye. And he said, you're going to be blind and you'll never play hockey again. Well, I was nineteen and I jumped back in my bed and the goals that I set for myself were gone. So I get out of the hospital within the next four weeks, I'm back on the ice practising.

MG: And you didn't tell anybody that you had gone through this accident, right?

WILLIE O'REE: No, I told my younger sister Betty, and I swore her to secrecy when I got out of the hospital and got back playing, got back, starting, you know, practising, skating. Everybody thought that I'd recovered from the injury, but I was blind in my right eye. I never even told my parents because I know that they'd probably want me to quit.

MG: Isn't it dangerous? Isn't it dangerous to play? I mean, hockey moves it a thousand miles an hour. Isn't it dangerous to play hockey if you're blind in one eye at that time?

WILLIE O'REE: But I could still see out of my left eye. And, you know, the only difference, I just couldn't see it in my right eye. Being a left hand shot and playing left wing to compensate. When I was skating down the ice, I had to turn my head all the way around to the right, look over my right shoulder to pick the puck in the playoff. And consequently, I was overskating the puck and missing and that, and I just said, well, forget about what you can't see and just concentrate on what you can see. So the season ends. And then I get a phone call from Punch Imlach, who was the coach of the Quebec Aces that professional team up in Quebec, Canada. And he said, Willie, I want to play the last couple of years. I'd like to invite you to training camp. And then I make the team. Back then they didn't take any exams. I never sat in front of them. I'm ashamed because if I had, they would have found out that I was blind in my right eye.

MG: In addition to this, I mean, you're a great hockey player and you're going up the ranks, but you're also a really good baseball player, right?

WILLIE O'REE: Yes. I've got an offer to go down to the Milwaukee Brewers in 1956, and I didn't want to go because I know the way blacks are treated in the south and it's all the turmoil and the thing that was going on. My parents didn't want me to go. So my older brother, who had been my mentor, he says, well how do you feel inside? I said, well I really feel I'd like to go down for the experience. He says, well, if you feel that way, then go. So I fly into Atlanta, stepped off the plane, went into the terminal and the first signs I saw- so the restrooms were white only and coloured only. And then I had to stand in line overnight and I contacted a black cab driver from the terminal, explained my situation, and he took me to an all black neighbourhood. And I stayed there overnight, took the bus into Waycross, which is about a three hour bus ride into Waycross, was assigned a dorm with about seven other players of colour, started practising the next day. I could hear the racial remarks from some of the white players, but it didn't bother me. And I played shortstop and second base and played well and then going into the third week and they explained to me that I needed a little more seasoning, but they were impressed with my play. So I was going to be sent home. I had to ride the bus and I was five days on the bus and the blacks had to sit in the back of the bus. And I sat on the back of the bus and I had never been experienced to this.

MG: What was that like for you to be in the back of the bus?

WILLIE O'REE: Well, I was, I was really, I was really scared. I just sat there. The only time I got off the bus was to maybe grab a sandwich or something, get back to go with the rest from the back on the bus and get the buses rolling up to the northern states. And as we were getting closer up north, I started moving up in the bus and finally got to Bangor, Maine. And I'm sitting at the back of the bus another hours, and I'm back in my hometown, Frederickton. I stepped off the bus and I said, Willie, forget about baseball, concentrate on hockey. And then that's when [unintelligible] got a hold of me. And I went up to the Quebec Aces. We won the league that year. That's when I told myself that, Willie, you can do anything you set your mind to do if you feel strong within your mind. The next year, I was invited to the Bruins training camp. And then on January the 18th, the Bruins contacted the Aces and says, we want O'Ree to meet the Bruins in Montreal to play two games against Montreal Canadian Saturday night in Montreal in the form, and then Sunday night back in Boston. So from then, I just, you know.

MG: Tell me about the first goal he scored in the NHL.

WILLIE O'REE: So on January the 1st, it was New Year's night in Boston against the Montreal Canadiens were we're warming up. And Charlie Hodge is the backup goalie. He's a net. So as I'm skating around one of my team-mates, he said, Willie, he says, if we ever get in on Hodge, he says, keep the puck low. He's got a good glove, keep it away from his glove. So we're warming up and the game starts. And, you know, I'm playing at the game. Third period, it's about, oh, about eight minutes left to go in the third period. I'm playing left wing and I break away from my check. I bust down to the left wing and a little boy just hit me with a perfect pass. I didn't even have to break stride. And I get the puck and I went around and then I go in around the two defencemen. Now I'm going in on Honiton as I'm going in and I'm going, I hear in the back of my mind slow Willie. Keep it low. So I got the puck and it hit the just the inside of the post, just off the ice. And that goes and that makes it three to one for there for the Bruins. And then about four minutes later the Pocket Rockets scores. But the goal, that I got that, turned out to be the winning goal. But I can honestly say when I was going in on Hodge and I made a couple of moves on them, all I could hear was [unintelligible] in the back of my mind going, low, low, keep it low, Willie. And I just kept the puck low and hit the inside of the post, went into the game, the game winner.

MG: You talked about how, you know, you were able to keep the racist insults that you were getting kind of out of your head in one ear and out the other. But there were some pretty ugly moments in the NHL.

WILLIE O'REE: There were, you know, I had to- you know, I never fought because of racial remarks or racial slurs. You know, back then, none of the players wore any helmets, no face shield, no cages or anything. And a lot of guys took a lot of shots of my head, you know, in Chicago, that incident with Eric Nesterenko.

MG: Just briefly tell that story, because that's a pretty rough situation.

WILLIE O'REE: Yes, well, first trip into Chicago, I'm warming up, just getting around, warming up. And Nesterenko comes and he gives me a two hundred across the ankles as we're warming up, you know, and I could see him, John, at me. And so the guy said, don't worry, don't worry about it, Will. And so I'm just getting around and, you know, he comes back again and he shows up and I just take my stick. And I pointed at him. And so anyway, the game the game starts. I think it was about my third shift on the ice. I get there behind the Chicago net and I dumped the puck off the boards and I get it and I pass it out to my winger. And Nesterenko comes in on my blind side. I can't see him and he holds and he buttons being in the mouth. He split my upper lip, not my two front teeth out, split my nose. And then so you just stood there. So I, you know, I hit him over the head with my stick and I broke my stick and I know we're going to fight. So anyway, he grabs me and hits me a couple of times and I just grab him, hold on to it. And the both benches emptied out. All the Bruins come out of their bench, only Blackhawks come out of their benches. It is ninety two minutes in penalties. I guess it's just I was thrown out the game. I go in and they stick me up and plug my nose and everything and I'm trying to listen to the game, but you can't really hear it in the dressing room and I'm pacing back and forth. And then the game ends and usually you have to walk out and up a ramp to get outside the arena. Well, there were so many fans going down there, they had to bring the bus right down inside, just parked it outside the dressing room, and they had to put a tarp over it because the fans were throwing everything that they'd get their hands on. You know, the next step back in Chicago is to do to the same thing. But I didn't have any more problems with them.

MG: You met him later on in life, right?

WILLIE O'REE: Yes. In 1991. I had left the league in 1961. In 1991, the NHL had their all star game in Chicago. I got an invitation for me and my wife. So I go with the wife. We stay at the Drake Hotel, nice hotel. We're at this big function sitting around the table. And my wife wanted a glass of red wine and there wasn't any on the table. So I said I'll go to the bar and get you one. So I go to the bar and I asked for a glass of wine, and who walks up and is about five feet next to me is Nesterenko. So he looks down and what's going on and says, not too much, Eric. And I said, well, let's get it on. So I figured we were going to get at it, but he just looked at me and didn't say anything more. And he turned went his way. And I turned and went back to the table. But I was ready. I was ready to go with him, you know, he is in the back of my mind. But all I wanted to do is just play hockey. I knew that guys wanted to, you know, have a piece of me. But I just [unintelligible]. I never fought for racial remarks and racial slurs. I just watched because guys, you know, scared me, but ended me in crosschecking, you know, took shots at my head.

MG: And let me ask you about hockey, now. We've seen there's been this a summer of reckoning in many ways when it comes to racial relations and antiblack racism in particular. And sports have tried to be out front in this. How do you think the NHL has done? How do you think hockey has done in terms of handling this issue?

WILLIE O'REE: Oh, I think they've done great. I really do. You know, they got 30 teams in the NHL and then what the hell is going to come in, what, next year? And I think Commissioner Bettman has done a tremendous job. It's you know, it's tough with these players and especially the black players and the players of colour that are in the league now go there. And not because they're black. They're there because they have the skills and the ability to, you know, to be there. They've proven themselves. They're good enough to play in the NHL. And I know that I've talked to a lot of them and I've met a lot of them in my travels, shook hands with them. And they just say that, hey, well, I can't imagine what you had to go through to make it possible for players like myself to play in the league. And I have the highest respect and admiration for you. And that makes me feel good to hear this from players, you know, making that type of money that they are today.

MG: You do a lot of work to diversify hockey. And I mean, it's with community groups. You're working to make sure that kids who perhaps wouldn't have a chance to get into the game have that chance. Do those kids that are playing the young kids, do they see themselves with a pathway to to the NHL?

WILLIE O'REE: Yes, I don't them going to play in the NHL. All I want all I want these boys and girls to do is play and have fun. You know, once you get these boys and girls on the ice, 90 percent of the job is done because they really enjoy playing. And there are more kids playing hockey today than ever before. There's more girls playing hockey now than ever before, more than those girls teams. And I think it's great. I think that there's still there could be more range with this coronaviruses. Two rinks here in San Diego are closing and they're nice rinks. They two sheets of ice restaurants, everything in sight. But they just can't keep it going. And it's a shame that these kids need a place to play and some of them drive thirty miles, you know, to practise and play. But the game has changed and it's a better game now than it was back in, you know, in the 60s.

MG: You call out in your book Con Smythe, the one time owner of the Toronto Maple Leafs, you call him a bigot. Why do you why do you call him that?

VOICE 2: Well, did I say he was- well. I heard Carnegie went to his training camp back when went to the Rangers and when went to the league's training camp. And there was a quote there by Con Smythe saying that if I could turn [unintelligible] to be white, he'd be playing with the Leaves. Now, I don't know if that remark constitutes being a bigot or not, but I mean, to make a racial statement like that, I just don't understand that.

MG: Do you think they should rename the Conn Smythe Trophy, which is given to the most valuable player during the NHL playoffs?

WILLIE O'REE: Well, I have no comment on that. Whatever they do, whatever reason that they have, I don't want to answer that.

MG: It speaks to how sticky of an issue it is, in some ways.

WILLIE O'REE: It is. I mean, you just try and even today I've had racial remarks directed towards me, you know, at a gas station or in a in a store. And I just can't understand, you know, like I don't know, just because of my colour, because of who I am. A lot of people don't know who I am. But, you know, I learnt one great thing from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. when he said, don't judge a person by the colour of their skin, but the content of their character. And there's a lot of truth to that. Why can't you just look at the person as just an individual, a person? I get up in the morning and I look in the mirror and I don't see a brown man or black man. I just see a man. But a lot of people today- and it's still happening in all sports. There is a race problem in this country. And it stems from way back, you know, from the days of slavery.

MG: Would you have ever imagined just finally, before I let you go? That's the great grandson of a man who was enslaved would ever be inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame?

WILLIE O'REE: Honest. You know, I didn't know much about my ancestry. I never realised that I had grandparents that were eventually going to be made history.

MG: You've made history and you've changed kids lives and given them the opportunity, I think, to think that they could see themselves in that league. It's a real pleasure to talk to you.

WILLIE O'REE: Oh, thank you. Yes, these kids could do anything they set their minds to do. When the doctor told me I'd never play hockey again. And then I got back on the ice and I forgot about I couldn't see out of my right eye, all of a sudden I get to skate. I could still shoot the puck. I could still do everything I did, you know, before I lost my eye and said, I'm going to prove that I can still play the game. But it's still a lot of people today don't realise in the 21 years I've played hockey, I played with one eye. And this is why I wanted to write this book and let them know.

MG: Willie O'Ree, congratulations on everything you've achieved and thank you for talking to us all.

WILLIE O'REE: It was our pleasure. And you keep safe and be well, you know, with this virus thing going on. We hope things get better and we're strong. So looking forward to the future.

MG: You take care of yourself.

WILLIE O'REE: You too. Bye bye, sir.

MG: Willie O'Ree's new book is called Willie The Game Changing Story of the NHL First Black Player. What a thrill to talk to him. That is The Current for today. Coming up next on CBC Radio on its Q Speaking of thrill's AC/DC. For a long time, it felt like that band was over and done with Malcolm Young. The founding guitarist had died. Lead singer Brian Johnson lost his hearing. But what do you know? AC/DC is back. They have a new album. Bryan Johnson speaks with Tom Power in just a moment's time. Before we let you go, though.

SOUNDCLIP

[Song: Good News]

I did an awesome.

MG: A little bit of good news, and you could probably use that. Three years ago today, we followed Margaret Meister as she celebrated her one second birthday on a dory boat in Nova Scotia.

[sc].

MG: Here you go . And stepped right on there.

MARGARET: Are you sure you don't mind?

MG: No, I'm glad to have you. You're the youngest girl we've ever had in this dory.

MARGARET: Will I sit here.

MG: Yes, that's the throne? Yup.

MARGARET: Oh. Oh, it's a dream come true.

MG: A dream come true. Yes.

[Singing Row You're Boat]

MG: A dream come true indeed. We are happy to share that Margaret celebrated her 104 fifth birthday this fall. The nursing home where she lives has strict COVID rules, so she's only been able to get outside twice since March. But she made it to the waterside this week. We put up on Twitter a photo of Margaret beside the dory. Joy Saunders is another woman we featured on that very same show about centenarians.

SOUNDCLIP

JOY: If you can't laugh, you might as well end it because the song was something to laugh at. No, no. I've had a good life. I have no complaints. Could have had a little more sex. Well, you know, it's thirty years of joy.

[Laughter]

MG: Joy celebrated her 102 second birthday. And not to be outdone by Margaret, she marked the occasion by walking around Lunenburg a hundred and two times. Well done to you both. The song once said, Age Ain't Nothing but a Number, and those two women live that to its fullest. Congratulations. I'm Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening to The Current. Have a great weekend. We'll talk to you on Monday.

SOUNDCLIP

[Song]

Friday November 13, 2020 Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode