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 2017

The Current Transcript for December 8, 2017

Host: Piya Chattopadhyay

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Listen to the full episode

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

When we talk about making trade deals that work for everyone, it's not just a nice spin to put on modern trade-offs, it's good saying we need to make sure we're benefiting our citizens.

It's a high minded approach to trade that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took with him to China this week. The Liberal government's commitment to progressive trade seeks to strike a bargain for the best of both worlds, access to lucrative markets like China's while protecting the environment among other things. Problem is China wasn't buying it. So is it asking for too much especially at a time when our trade deal with United States may be on the rocks? We'll explore that in just a few moments. Then.

SOUNDCLIP

What sort of a web do you want? Do you have a Web where the cable companies determine which opinions are read? If we lose net neutrality we lose the internet as we know it.

PC: That's Timothy Berners Lee the inventor of the Worldwide Web. And he is very concerned about an imminent decision in the United States that could end what's known as net neutrality. In half an hour we're asking what such a move could mean for us, here in Canada because the ramifications could be very real. And after that:

SOUNDCLIP

[Crowd cheering] Viva la pizzaiaulo! Vive Italiano!

PC: Pizza makers in Naples Italy are celebrating after the United Nations cultural organization honored their art. So what and where are Canada's intangible cultural Heritage highlights? We're seeking them out in an hour. And for all you pizza lovers will learn a bit more about the finer points of making Neapolitan pie as well. Hi. I am Piya Chattopadhyay and this is the Friday edition of The Current.

Back To Top »

Trudeau's 'progressive' trade agenda with China seen as arrogant, say critics

Guests: Wenran Jiang, Martha Hall Findlay, David Lametti

SOUNDCLIP

When we talk about modern trade deals, like the one we signed with the European Union, we brought in significant progressive elements. The kinds of things that ensure that we get growth the benefits of that growth are broadly phrased. If we move forward with simply straight classic trade deals that focus on tariffs and barriers, then we are going to find ourselves in a world where protectionism and inward thinking is the only option.

PC: Well that was Justin Trudeau in China earlier this week explaining his so-called 'progressive trade agenda'. And while it's the sort of aspirational agenda that may play well at home, it may not have been a great opening salvo for trade negotiations with China. The Prime Minister has just returned from a four day trip to that country and he returned without a promise to start formal talks on a comprehensive trade deal with the economic powerhouse. Those progressive elements; environmental, gender, and labor protections may have been a stumbling block in moving forward toward a deal. We'll hear from a representative of the government in just a bit. But first I'm joined by two people who are critical of Trudeau's progressive trade agenda. Wenran Jiang is senior fellow at the Institute of Asian Research at the University of British Columbia and Martha Hall Findlay is the president and CEO of the Canada West Foundation a think tank that looks at western Canadian issues. They are both in our Calgary studio. Hello to you both.

MARTHA HALL FINDLAY: Hello.

WENRAM JIANG: Good morning.

PC: Wenram Jiang let me begin with you. What is your take on how our prime minister fared in China this week?

WENRAM JIANG: Well we have heard all the negative coverage in both Canada, around the world and in China. So I'm not going to summarize those further but I want to say as bad as it being reported I want to remind our listeners to step a little bit back. And as my colleague Paul Evans at UBC said 'this is, for a long time we're re-entering to have a new summit meeting between the two countries top leaders and that at its minimum is not bad.' Of course we can say we didn't have much to deliver and that's the paradox of having a new summit commitment. You need to deliver something and this year, obviously we're under delivered and we need to do some soul searching.

PC: Well let me ask you that because you mentioned it played out poorly in both the Canadian and Chinese media. Many of us have read it in the Canadian media or listen to it but how are Chinese officials viewing this trip?

WENRAM JIANG: Well the Chinese are ranging from being patient, pragmatic- Remember those that Premier Li Keqiang and President Xi Jinping had very private moments was Justin Trudeau and they highly priest bilateral relations, from the foundation level. So they're patient but down on the working level, with the enterprise level, people say "what is all this about? Coming to China to lecture us," all these issues as if we don't care about these issues. So then, not quite happy about the tone of how he's been communicated.

PC: Okay Martha Hall Findlay you are a former Liberal leadership candidate and an MP. What do you think you're Justin Trudeau pushing a progressive trade agenda while he was in China?

MARTHA HALL FINDLAY: Piya, I think first I need to start with saying that I am a raging unapologetic feminist. I'm a huge supporter of progressive views on gender equality, human rights, environmental protections and labor conditions. But despite the nice sounding, rhetoric trade agreements are just not effective in pushing that agenda forward.

PC: Because.

MARTHA HALL FINDLAY: Partly because in doing so we turn potential trade partners away. We have been seen as - I mean we like to think of ourselves as being nice and the rest are world like us. But when it comes to these trade agreements frankly, we've seen this in the global media, we're coming across as being patronizing. We're coming across as arrogant and frankly we're coming across as being naive. The rest of the world is playing chess and we're coming with our checkers.

PC: Okay so as you say you're a feminist you admire all these things that our prime ministers taking to the table. So what is the better way - if not his way - to achieve these objective around gender and labor rights and the environment?

MARTHA HALL FINDLAY: Well what's interesting is that it's actually greater economic and other engagement which comes from more trade that is actually more effective. The more we engage with other countries the more there is mutual recognition of how things are done. There's a greater awareness of seeing - in some of these countries that may not be as exposed to some of the Western values for example that we hold is so important - the greater the exposure the more there's a recognition domestically. We want that to. What we really want in Canada has greater intellectual property protection. We want greater insistence on the rule of law; certainty, dispute settlement, security, e-commerce. These are all the things that you know 21st century trade agreement should be dealing with. We should also be looking at domestic support [unintelligible] so they can better participate. But instead when we lead with these soft and - as I said earlier patronising - frankly requirements that other countries often with very different and often very challenging histories, that we come along and say they need to change their domestic policies to suit our Western value system. It's not at all surprising that China and others are look are now looking at Canada with significant disdain and frankly a lack of credibility.

PC: They will talk about the others in just a sec, but Wenran Jiang what do you think, I mean do you agree that Prime Minister Trudeau should have even going in with that progressive trade agenda or done it some other way?

WENRAM JIANG: Well as Martha just mentioned we are quite advanced. We're doing better in all these categories of the quote unquote 'progressive trade agenda'. But the issue is the Chinese want these as well. I want to actually emphasize here, in the past week, overwhelming media coverage including some of the China experts coming to say 'China and Canada has totally opposing values'. I don't think that's the case. The Chinese if you talk to them, the leaders, they wanted the good life. They want the middle class life. They want better environment. They want to have gender you call it. They want to have pay equality. These are not opposing values. The issue is that there are still at a fairly earlier, or not advanced in terms of development and they have many challengers. And China has made tremendous progress. Everybody knows who listen and talk about China. That's the thing we need to communicate better rather than going saying 'we have this progressive trade agenda. We want you to listen to us'. We can say 'let's do this together. We can do this together even though we have different political systems'.

PC: Do you agree with Martha Hall Findlay that our Prime Minister and those with him came across as patronizing and smug to China?

WENRAM JIANG: In many ways is being perceived that way. And that's why I thought we should actually do a better communication job by telling the Chinese that we're pursuing not something totally opposing. We're not coming here to impose value. And I think now with the trip done all his inner circle people, negotiating team, his company members, bureaucracy, and the general public should reflect on how we engage the emerging superpower that is in many ways have a different political system, governance system.

MARTHA HALL FINDLAY: And Piya, listen, there's no question that China has in terms of human rights in terms of a variety of things that doesn't. That's not that stuff that we're happy about but we already trade with China. So are we going to say that, so far the trade that we've been engaging in and it's growing with China, China's now our second largest trading partner - Do we say "well we don't actually like some of the things that you do so we're going to stop trading altogether"? Or are we going to say "we recognize that there are problems, in fact there are lots of countries around the world we disagree with. We have real issues with" but for the sake of these feel good domestic virtue signalling well, we we are potentially losing opportunity to huge markets. I mean even five and ten years ago, there are millions and millions of people who couldn't afford much but who now want to buy beef and cheese and butter and wine and education. And we have to remember we are only 36 million people. There are over 100 cities each a million people alone.

PC: But the argument back to that Martha Hall Findlay is why should we park our values in order to get a trade deal?

MARTHA HALL FINDLAY: We're not. That's the whole point. We're not parking our values. Nobody is saying that we're parking our values in order to get a trade deal. To my point earlier, we haven't parked our values to engage in trade so far, so why would we all of a sudden feel as though we're parking our values by not insisting on a different change in order to enhance that trade. Enhanced trade provides greater engagement and greater engagement that we've seen particularly in China over the last 40 years, massively greater engagement with the rest of the world has changed China dramatically. Personal freedoms - as much as we might have trouble with human rights and issues now for sure but the difference between now and 40 years is astounding. So let's engage more let's actually use greater engagement to effect those changes rather than insist on it being an economic agreement.

PC: I want to pull this out a bit from China because earlier this year Canada announced a new chapter on trade and gender in the revamped Canada Chile Free Trade Agreement, and it said it was now going to apply a gender perspective to economic and trade issues. And then with the Trans Pacific Partnership talks last month in Vietnam Prime Minister Trudeau was also once again advocating on environment, labor rights, and gender equality during those talks. Outside of China I mean is this a good approach elsewhere Wenram Jiang?

WENRAM JIANG: I mean we can talk about this but we have to be treading this very carefully. Remembering the different version of the TPP advance in Vietnam are led by no other than democracies such as Japan, Australia and New Zealand and those latter two countries already had the free trade agreement with China by playing internationally as well as China, saying 'we're bringing you the progressive trade agenda,' it put all these other democracies in a very awkward position. That's why they're looking at this saying 'are we not progressive enough when we are teaming up to do TPP or the countries such as Iceland, you know Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand all having free trade agreement with China already?' And so we need to look at this as saying Let's communicate this better without sacrificing these standards. Surely we can communicate better and to our allies as well as Chinese to accept rather than not having the expected results.

PC: Martha Hall Findlay is the problem here, China TPP and beyond, a tonal problem?

MARTHA HALL FINDLAY: Yeah well I unfortunately when we sacrifice our credibility so dramatically around the world - I mean don't take this personally but the Canadian Press has been very soft on this around the world. We've been raked over the coals and not just by the Chinese press, by the Australians, by the New Zealand. There really is a global sense of 'who did the Canadians think they are?' I mean to [unintelligible] that point you have Australia and New Zealand already do have trade agreements with China. But Piya, you raise the question of Chile and I'm glad you did because I think there's something we really need to understand about that and it's the tone. It's all well and good to have these nice sounding words except for the fact that in the Chile agreement the stuff about gender equality sounds good but there is no enforcement. There's really there's no teeth. And frankly as a feminist I find it troubling that we put language in agreements like this that sound good but that actually don't mean anything. I actually worry.

PC: That it is symbolic.

MARTHA HALL FINDLAY: Well, and symbolism can be wonderful. Don't get me wrong. But I actually worry that we actually are substituting symbolism for real results. And at that point we may actually accomplish less. So you'll hear people point to the Chile agreement but a big warning. You know symbolism might be nice but it might actually make things worse frankly if we're not getting real results.

PC: All right we'll have to leave it there with you both. Thank you both for your perspectives on all of this appreciate it.

MARTHA HALL FINDLAY: Thanks very much, Piya.

WENRAM JIANG: Thank you.

PC: Wenram Jiang is a senior fellow at the Institute of Asian Research at UBC and Martha Hall Findlay is the president and CEO of the Canada West Foundation. They were both in our Calgary studio. Well Navdeep Bains the minister of innovation science and economic development was also part of Canada's delegation to China. And before he left this country to go there, he outlined the Government's objectives on Global TV's The West Block.

SOUNDCLIP

We want to move forward in a meaningful way to advance trade discussion between Canada and China and that'll be top priority, one of the top priorities for us on the trip.

PC: That is innovation science and economic development minister Navdeep Bains speaking before he and the Canadian delegation went to China. Well we're joined now by David Lametti. He is the MP for LaSalle-Emard-Verdun and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of innovation science and economic development Navdeep Bains. David Lemetti is in our Ottawa studio, hello.

DAVID LAMETTI: Good morning.

PC: You heard what Mr. Bain said just there. Did your government achieve its objective in China?

DAVID LAMETTI: I think we did. We're moving we're moving forward. It was very constructive and positive visit. I think what I have to underline and I think both of your previous experts. Know this, these things take time. These relationships need to be built over time. This was the second annual meeting between leaders. Already, that's a good step. And it's pushing our agenda forward of engagement and I know Martha Hall Findlay mentioned this but it really is about engagement number of different fronts.

PC: You say that but the coverage at least from both the Chinese media and the Canadian media has been 'the engagement didn't really work. China didn't really like this approach' so what kind of engagement is that?

DAVID LAMETTI: Well it's engagement on a number of different levels. We continue our discussions on moving forward towards formal trade negotiations, that's continued. We had a joint statement on clean growth and clean tech and that's a significant step in the fight against climate change. We also had some improved access for pork and beef which is very important to producers in Canada. So we move forward incrementally. We continue to build a level of trust between the two countries and we move forward. I don't think we should perceive the progressive trade agenda negatively in any way. We know, as the prime minister mentioned in an interview yesterday, that we've seen a rise of protectionism around the world. And if we don't engage in a progressive trade agenda we are going to give people the feeling that they've been left out and there is a real feeling that people have been left out of the benefits of trade. And trade, as Martha Hall Findlay pointed out, as we all agree, is beneficial to the Canadian economy. We have to be good traders. But if we don't do this in a way that is is inclusive and brings people in.

PC: Is it about bringing people in though, in Canada? To Martha Hall Finldlay's points that this is virtue signalling for an audience back home.

DAVID LAMETTI: It's about bringing people in around the world. These feelings of exclusion are being felt in a variety of different places and we're moving forward constructively. I spent a year as Parliamentary Secretary to the minister of international trade going across the country consulting on on the previous government's TPP agreement. And I heard that we needed to think more about labour standards. I heard from people we need to think more about gender equality I heard from people we need to think about the environment and we did that in the TPP the new CTPP agreement that we're moving forward with the 11 remaining countries. It's a necessary response to what I think is a very real challenge and we've understood the complexity of it and we're moving forward in a very the other way.

PC: The other large sort of criticism is Canada's clout or lack thereof. So with NAFTA talks hanging in the balance, does Canada have the kind of trade leverage it needs to push for progressive reforms like this government wants to particularly with a powerhouse like China?

DAVID LAMETTI: We have to and you know as as your previous expert pointed out the Chinese share - to a large extent - share the goals, the progressive goals that we're trying to espouse. They care about the environment, they care about gender equality, they care about labor standards. Now we may be in different places in terms of where our economy is and societies have developed. But certainly we share those same aspirational goals.

PC: But are we the country did do it? Do we have the clout? Should it be us?

DAVID LAMETTI: Well we are we are good traders. Yes we're perceived as being nice but we're also very effective traders. We hit above our weight in terms of in terms of our trade and we're seen as being good partners. And I think everybody, every country has an obligation to push this forward and I think we would be remiss if we didn't stay true to our values. It is important that they be reflected in our trade agreement.

PC: I just have about a minute left, but what do you say to the criticism, the last point that Martha Hall Findlay made to some of the clauses like the one in the revamped Chile Canada free trade agreement, that they are meaningless because there is no enforcement, they are unfair unenforceable?

DAVID LAMETTI: These are all import steps forward. Every step is incremental when we're talking about trade with different countries, across the world in different contexts, bilateral, multilateral etc. And so every positive step that we can take is positive and important and I think we need to keep pushing forward in that direction.

PC: David Lametti thank you for your time as well.

DAVID LAMETTI: Thank you.

PC: David Lametti is the MP for LaSalle-Emard-Verdun and Parliamentary Secretary to Navdeep Bains, the minister of innovation science and economic development. Navdeep Bains was also part of the delegation to China this past week. And David Lametti was in our Ottawa studio today. By the way we did request interviews with the Minister of Foreign Affairs Chrystia Freeland as well as Minister of International Trade Francois Philippe Champagne. Neither were available. All right well the CBC News is coming your way next. And then after that.

SOUNDCLIP

The Internet in its current form is not broken and the FCC is currently taking steps to fix that.

PC: That is comedian John Oliver warning three years ago about the potential end of net neutrality in the United States. And as of next week it could finally become a reality. But what may it mean for all of us here in Canada? That discussion is coming up. If you want to get in touch with us here on the program about anything you hear today or any other day of the week, please do so. You can tweet us @TheCurrentCBC. You can post on Facebook: Facebook.com/thecurrent. And if you want to send us an e-mail please do so you can find out how to do that by going to our website cbc.ca/thecurrent. I am Piya Chattopadhyay. You're listening to the Friday edition of The Current. We're back just after the news.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Q&A: What would a U.S. repeal of net neutrality mean for Canadians?

Guests: Alexander Dirksen, Laura Tribe, Shelley Robinson

PC: Hi I'm Piya Chattopadhyay and you are listening to the Friday edition of The Current. The delicious tradition of making pizza has been added to the UNESCO intangibles list making it part of the world's cultural heritage. And I should be more specific. It is the delicious tradition of making Neapolitan pizza. Coming up in half an hour, a master pizza chef will be here to explain some of the finer points of making an authentic pie. And I'll also be joined by a panel of guests to talk about Canada's cultural intangibles. From Bannock to bilingual cereal boxes and much more. But first the future of going online.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: It spans the globe like a superhighway. It is called Internet. [Music] The net to longtime users.

VOICE 2: Internet as a whole group of networks.

VOICE 3: The net is made up of some 12000 individual computer networks. Internet began back in 1969 and was a tool at the Pentagon. Nowadays just about anyone with a computer and a modem can join it usually for a nominal fee.

PC: Well simpler times when we just called it 'internet' instead of the 'Internet'. Back in the early 1990s when we first started hearing about internet we couldn't have imagined how it would change the world. But today Internet users in the United States are worried about its future because next week the Federal Communications Commission, the FCC, is expected to vote to repeal so-called net neutrality regulations. It is a decision that could have far reaching effects including here in Canada. So to help us to understand how it might do that I am joined by Laura Tribe. She is the executive director of Open Media is a nonprofit dedicated to preserving the open Internet. She is in Vancouver. Laura. Hi.

LAURA TRIBE: Hi. So first of all you know over the last week or so we have been hearing about this looming vote, the FCC, but I want to start by asking you a very basic question which is what the heck is net neutrality anyway?

LAURA TRIBE: It's a good question. Net neutrality sounds really boring and it's really important. They are the rules that ensure that when you log onto the Internet, using the modem as pointed out earlier, you get the whole internet. When you log in it means that your Internet service provider can't pick and choose what you see online. They can't charge you more for some content or less for others and they're not allowed to discriminate against competing content to make sure that when you are charged, when you pay your internet bill you get the entire internet when you log in.

PC: Okay so this means for an everyday Internet user, which is most of us, I can go on the Internet type in whatever I want in that bar and go to whatever page I want - except for the dark web unless I know how to do that.

LAURA TRIBE: Exactly.

PC: Okay. Is there an analogy then when it comes to net neutrality - beyond like how we can use the internet everyday now - to help explain what a potential change might mean?

LAURA TRIBE: So essentially what they're trying to do in the U.S. and taking away these net neutrality rules means that the Internet is going to look a lot more like your cable package, which is exactly why we are turning to the Internet to get away from those cable packages. So it means that you're going to start to see things like bundles, the same way that we have sports packages and movie packages on TV. We'll start to see things like social media packages or news packages on the internet, which means that you could be charged more for any individual piece. And there's going to be extraordinary fees to unlock the entire internet the way that we already have access to it now.

PC: Who and why would people want this in the U.S.? Who does this benefit, getting rid of it?

LAURA TRIBE: Ultimately this benefits a very small handful of the telecom companies. It's just the big companies that are trying to protect their own business interests. They are ones that used to own cable and they're not making money off of it anymore so they're trying to make money off of the Internet now instead.

PC: And so why would the FCC I guess work in the interest of a few small big players rather than you know the common denominator of every citizen that uses the Internet?

LAURA TRIBE: Well that's part of what we're trying to figure out and part of what we're trying to stop. So Ajit Pai who's the chairman of the FCC is the one who's brought this plan forward. He's a former employee of Vrizon. Just two days ago he actually gave a keynote speech at Verizon. And essentially there's real concerns that the FCC has been captured by the incumbents and big telecom and they're not paying attention to what their citizens are looking for. We saw over 700 protests across the country yesterday outside of Horizon stores for exactly this concern.

PC: All right. So this is a U.S. issue at this point. We have different telecoms. We don't how the Verizon's and other things that they use in the U.S. for the most part. So the U.S. decision that, it is expected next week, do I need to care as a Canadian?

LAURA TRIBE: You do need to care as a Canadian. We do have net neutrality rules here in Canada. They look a little bit different to what they are in the U.S. but they're similar and they're really important, which means that when we log onto the Internet here in Canada we get the whole package just as we're used to it. But there will be impacts for us here in Canada. So the first one which is probably going to be the most immediately felt after this is repealed, if it is repealed, is that the costs are going to go up for some of the services that we love. So if Netflix has to pay extra to make sure that it's in internet fast lane in the U.S., they're going to have to pass those fees onto their customers. And it's really unlikely that the limit that to just their American customer base when they can diffuse it over a larger audience. So things like Spotify, Netflix or any of our favorite services and websites from the U.S. might get a bit more expensive.

PC: What is the Canadian position on net neutrality right now in terms of our governing bodies of it?

LAURA TRIBE: So we've seen really positive comments from Minister Bains, Minister Joly and Prime Minister Trudeau in support of net neutrality which is really really great. We've seen positive decisions from the CRTC which is our equivalent of the FCC that also supports net neutrality in the past, where some of the concerns are for us here in Canada is that the Telecommunications Act - which is the rules that oversee all of the decisions made at the CRTC and that protect net neutrality here in Canada - are up for review. And so as that gets put back on the table and we've seen as recently as last week, the CFTC closed its submission on what the future of programming and the Internet will look like in Canada, it's become a bit of a free for all. Everyone is trying to grab every aspect that they can and make up for the fact that cable TV is not what it used to be and really trying to find ways to poke holes in net neutrality.

PC: So if as you say if this is repealed next week in the US the ramifications for us here in Canada is the Netflix of the world could say 'we will pass on the price increase for the sort of bundling to our American customers and because we in Canada and elsewhere in the world also consume Netflix. Hey you guys are going to take a hit too'. What else is a potential ramification for us here in Canada?

LAURA TRIBE: Well we've already seen our own versions of big Telecom really taking their tips from that the U.S. So they're already fighting to have net neutrality in different ways repealed here in Canada too. And with the telecom act up for review that's a real concern of ours. So we're seeing already Bell has started putting forward proposals for things like censorship to start blocking content that they don't want people to have access to because it undermines their content and cable efforts. And I think the third thing for us to keep in mind is that it will actually make it harder for Canadian businesses to compete in the U.S. So one of the things that it will start to look like in the U.S. is that companies have to essentially pay to play. If you want to be delivered at the fastest speeds you might need to pay extra as a business. And so for Canadian businesses that might not have the same capital that U.S. companies do that they're competing against. They may not be able to pay to ensure that their content is making it into people's homes faster or not being throttled or blocked. So it's going to make it harder for us to enter the U.S. market as well.

PC: Laura tribe I'm going to get you or ask you to stick around. I want to bring someone else into this conversation but we'll come back to you. Alexander Dirksen is the manager of strategy and engagement with the First Nations Technology Council and he's a member of the Metis Nation of BC. He's also in Vancouver. Hello to you.

ALEXANDER DIRKSEN: Good morning. So let's talk about first nations communities and net neutrality and the potential repeal, how could all of this affect the first nations communities that you work with?

ALEXANDER DIRKSEN: So right now we're operating in what is really become a bit of an age of reconciliation. And when we talk about reconciliation it's not just about our shared history or some of the current trajectories that we're facing but also about the future. And a big part of that future is access. And what are we going to do to ensure that some of the barriers and stereotypes and limited access that we're seeing in the physical world right now for indigenous peoples aren't merely translated online? And so as we look at net neutrality you know this is a conversation that's right now happening in the United States, there's some big questions around access.

PC: Now let me ask you about that access when we talk about internet access. You know I even said I'm like everyone's on the internet. Not everyone has access to the Internet in our country. So what does the Internet access look like for some of the more rural or remote First Nations communities in this country?

ALEXANDER DIRKSEN: So the CRTC in December of last year ruled that the Internet was a basic service for all Canadians. Despite that there are a number of our communities that continue to face issues with connectivity, everything from not having any connectivity at all, which is still the case in a number of communities across Canada, but then also having limited choice. So having only one major player that provides that access to the Internet as well.

PC: Thank you for laying that out for me. If the net neutrality laws in the United States are repealed if there are the ramifications that Laura Tribe suggests would come here to our country, do you see any good coming out of the expected net neutrality rollback?

ALEXANDER DIRKSEN: Not really. I do think - the one thing that has kind of emerged around this net neutrality conversation is that it has gotten Canadians to be talking about these issues and really looking at what the internet means and what access means and I think that's a really important conversation. But in terms of if these rules do come into effect and if they were to come to Canada, I don't necessarily see any real benefits, especially considering that as you mentioned there hasn't been a level playing field to begin with. And I think net neutrality, if it were to be repealed would just be further exacerbated.

PC: And I want you to talk a little bit more of the point that you made earlier which is in this era of reconciliation. Talk to me about the connection between those goals and digital access.

ALEXANDER DIRKSEN: So when we're talking about digital access it's on a number of fronts. So it's everything from remote communities. There's tele-health and there's some very basic services that are delivered or supported through digital means all the way out to sort of activism and resistance in some cases as well. And so the Internet in the 21st century has become a very vital tool for nation building. And as we're talking about an age of reconciliation and we're talking about a nation to nation relationships, the concern is that we're now seeing some big tech players especially out of the states and big telecom companies that are actually becoming more powerful than the traditional Western state. And so as we're talking about nation to nation relationships that has a huge impact in terms of the future of Indigenous nationhood here in Canada.

PC: And as you as you say the Internet activism that we've seen from various indigenous communities, whether it's 'idle no more' or #reconciliation150, that is where a lot of these issues really get a lot of traction and leap into the mainstream.

ALEXANDER DIRKSEN: Exactly exactly. And I think you know when we're talking about say for example something like Twitter, not only is that a powerful platform for Indigenous voices, but we're also facing issues as well just around the demographics of those individuals that are creating those platforms. So if we're seeing not only the limit in terms of the limited experiences crafting those platforms but then a limit of what can be said on those platforms, it really minimizes Indigenous voices as we move into the increasingly digital age.

PC: Laura Tribe brought up the word censorship and the risks of that in a way are you concerned about that.

ALEXANDER DIRKSEN: Yes I think especially as we're looking at especially claims agreements. If we're looking at especially with some of the conversations ongoing around natural resource development as well the ability for nations to access freely the content that they need to be making informed decisions about their future is critical. And access is a huge part of that and limiting that will really limit the ability of indigenous nations to plan their futures in the most informed way.

PC: Alexander Dirksen thank you. Thank you. Alexander Dirksen is the manager of strategy and engagement with the First Nations Technology Council. He is in Vancouver. Laura Tribe is also still with us. She's the executive director of Open Media which is a non-profit dedicated to preserving the open Internet. Laura, Alexander Dirksen has concerns for Indigenous communities. Who else or what other groups stand to lose the most if net neutrality is repealed in the U.S.?

LAURA TRIBE: I think that when we're looking at communities in the US and Canada that really suffer the most from any sort of attack on net neutrality, it's anyone who isn't in the most privileged position. If you cannot afford to pay for everything and you're content isn't in the majority, you're the most likely to suffer. So we've seen concerns from advocates around accessibility and what does it look like when you need accessible content but really you can only afford the most basic services that are being put through. We've seen a lot of concerns around again as was mentioned earlier tele-health services and what does that look like. If you think that you only need content for email and Facebook which is something that you know we kind of say 'we only use the Internet for those few things'. What happens when you're linking off to articles that are off site and so it's we view the Internet as this monolithic thing but really only use parts of it. But when you think about what the impact is when you start to lose different parts of it or only get exposed to certain parts of it, it really shapes the discourse of who we are as a community as well when we're only seeing bits and pieces of the content that's available to us. It's kind of the equivalent of saying you can only have access to authors A to C in the library or something like that.

PC: Or only access to basic cable or not even cable because you can't afford any of those bundles or packages.

LAURA TRIBE: Exactly.

PC: Okay. And to that point I want to bring in another person into our conversation. Shelley Robinson is executive director of national capital Freenet an independent non-profit Internet service provider. She's in Ottawa. Hello Shelley.

SHELLEY ROBINSON: Good morning.

PC: So let's talk about you provide Internet access at relatively low prices or lower prices than than many people pay, in Ottawa, who uses your services?

SHELLEY ROBINSON: So anyone who wants affordable internet. We do have a special program with Ottawa Community Housing so all our packages are unlimited but that's an unlimited offering at a lower cost. And we try and keep our prices as low as possible so that's why we're not for profit we can invest back. So in 12 years we've had to change our prices twice only and in one of those times we dropped them.

PC: You know I've heard this before from people who are homeless or just don't have access to the Internet, like to Go get some of my government services or other services like I have to go on the internet and I don't have access to a computer in order to do that. So give me more of a reality check for the people you see.

SHELLEY ROBINSON: Sure. So we're doing the project now it's a partnership with ACORN which is a low income rights group. And we're teaching people digital literacy skills in the context of applying for online subsidies. So for instance the Ontario electricity support program. So it's an underutilized program because a lot of the people it's targeting don't have Internet access at home and then we also face the idea that some people maybe aren't totally as comfortable with it, because if you don't have it at is home you're not as used to using it. So folks come in and we teach them to apply for the subsidy and then they're learning those skills at the same time. And so these are folks with very low income some time who have this money available to them but without that Internet access and the skills to use it they're not going to get the benefits.

PC: And as Laura pointed out there will be a ripple effect should the U.S. net neutrality laws be repealed. Ramifications here in Canada. Do you see the ramifications as well hitting the population that you talk about beyond a price and access point?

SHELLEY ROBINSON: For sure. Like Laura said I think we're in a good place now in terms of Canadian net neutrality but we do have to be mindful of the future. And so if that happened it means that you know there's a kind of fast lane for the Internet. And so you know content that's produced by communities that can't afford to pay the fast lane prices. So you know Netflix and Google they might not like it but they'll be able to pay so that people can access their content quickly. But small not for profits or community based organizations or even individuals who right now have the ability to get their voices out on an equal platform wouldn't have that chance.

PC: And as Laura said you know Canada is committed officially to net neutrality right now. But hearing inklings of some people in some groups and some businesses who are maybe suggesting that that's not the way that they think things should go forward, do you think that Canada is committed to protecting net neutrality?

SHELLEY ROBINSON: So we have heard you know from those ministers some good things about the current government’s direction and that's great. But I agree that enshrining it in the new Telecoms Act will make a huge difference. Because you know there's a huge profit motive here and when there's a big profit motive there's a lot of lobbying that goes behind that and there's a lot of might. And so any time people stand to make a lot of money by making a big change then they're going to push for that.

PC: Shelley Robinson thank you for your time.

SHELLEY ROBINSON: Thanks.

PC: Shelley Robinson is the executive director of National Capital Freenet. She is in Ottawa. Laura Tribe has been listening in from Vancouver and of course I've been talking with her. She is executive director of the digital advocacy group Open Media. Laura Tribe what do you say to Shelley's view about this is going to hit lower income people and people that she helps out if the net neutrality laws are pulled back in the U.S.?

LAURA TRIBE: Well I think she's absolutely right. I mean we've already seen in recent reports that have come out from the CRTC itself that the lowest income communities are the hardest hit. They're having to drop home internet in favor of mobile phones because they have to choose between the two. We see a number of communities just outside of rural areas that can only afford satellite internet which really limits what they can and can't do online. And so when you're already fighting just to get online when you then have to pick and choose what you can do online, it's going to have a real repercussion for those in the lowest income bracket as well.

PC: You mentioned Ajit Pai who is the FCC chairman who's proposing these changes. He says that this will be a good thing for the free market. I want to read you and our listeners a little bit about what he said. He said "the FCC will no longer be in the business of micromanaging business models and pre-emptively prohibiting services and applications and products that could be pro-competitive. We should simply set rules of the road that let companies of all kinds in every sector compete and let consumers decide who wins and loses." Laura Tribe what do you say to that?

LAURA TRIBE: Well I'm not an economics major but I would say that that is working with the assumption that you're starting on a level playing field. And when you're looking at what we have particularly in the U.S. right now, the size of some of these companies and their ability to pay and pay their competitors is extraordinary. And if it were really a level playing field and really letting the free market win we wouldn't be starting with where we are now. I think when you look at the competition in the U.S. there's a limited number of carriers and we're already seeing them trying to eat out all of their competition. And then when you take that in the amount of money that they have any amount of money that they can charge the other large internet companies like Shelley was mentioning where "yeah Netflix might not like it but they can afford to pay. Can everyone else?" Is the biggest pocket books really the way that we want to decide what the future of our internet looks like in a content we have available to us? I don't think so.

PC: You know using the analogy of the cable companies when prices started going up some people said we'll pay more and because I want that stuff and a lot of people said "you know what? I'm out I'm just not going to do that". It's the internet I get it's a bit of a I'm conflating the two because they are very different. But I mean what are the options for regular people if net neutrality rules are repealed in the United States or elsewhere perhaps here in Canada, although I should say that the government says it is committed to net neutrality in our country?

LAURA TRIBE: Well I think if the rules are repealed in the U.S. it looks like we have a long legal battle ahead of us. I don't think this is going to be any quick and dirty completion. So we've seen amazing backlash from American citizens who are contacting their congressional representatives to make sure that they know that their voices are heard. And I think this will be something that, if it is repealed and their congressional representatives don't speak up, we will see is an election issue in the next round of elections in Canada. I think similarly, I think that for us you know if we lose it there will be real ramifications for Internet users from every income bracket and every use type. But what we're really looking for is making sure that we actually help the government and the CRTC get it right. So we want to make sure that we actually proactively fix the telecommunications act to make it stronger and don't wait for big telecom to try and make it weaker.

PC: You know we started this part of the program hearing that clip about the net started and I think it was 69. Most of us joined in the last I don't know 15 years or so, but I'm wondering why now? Is there a timing component to this for the FCC to be doing this as far as you see it?

LAURA TRIBE: Yes I think there is a timing component with that. I mean I think it's a matter of who the people are that are in a leadership position right now and Ajit Pai's prize agenda and I think that it's also a reflection of the current administration in the United States and a real push for deregulation. And it's a conversation around deregulation as a means of increasing our freedoms as opposed to looking at what those regulations are in each case and what they're intended to do. And in this case those regulations are actually there to protect our freedoms, to make sure that we are free to see and do what we want online. So I think it's an agenda driving and misleading perhaps some of the conversation but it also really is a reflection of the U.S. corporate culture right now and how that is driving a lot of the decisions being made in politics right now.

PC: Because it is the worldwide web and the Internet, what about other Western democracies? We know that there is censorship and lack of access to the Internet in countries including China and Russia for example. But where are other Western democracies in terms of net neutrality?

LAURA TRIBE: So it varies from country to country around what the exact rules around net neutrality are. We see much stronger protections for them in Western democracies for sure but I think one of the things that we're seeing, even in Europe which does have net neutrality, is things like censorship machines being put forward, which are very similar to what Bell is proposing here in Canada, to ensure that content that they don't like, that they think violates their content licensing agreements, is preemptively blocked with their judicial processes to automate taking down content that the companies in control don't like. So even in other Western countries we are seeing these types of proposals that chip away at the foundation of net neutrality which is letting us have access to the entire internet.

PC: Laura Tribe, thank you very much for helping me understand this.

LAURA TRIBE: Thanks so much for having me.

PC: Laura Tribe is the executive director of Open Media a non-profit dedicated to preserving the open Internet. And she was in our Vancouver studio. Okay, we're switching gears because coming up in our next half hour the art of Neapolitan pizza making is being honored by UNESCO's United Nations cultural organizations. So what about the fine art of poutine making, playing pond hockey or setting one's watch to the National Research Council’s time signal?

[Music: Theme]

PC: We're on the hunt for Canada's intangible cultural gems that's in about 90 seconds, according to the NRC time signal. I'm Piya Chattopadhyay I. You're listening to the Friday edition of The Current. We're back in just a bit. Do let us know what you think of what you're hearing on this show. Get ready you're going to get hungry. We're making pizza in the studio. You can get in touch with us on The Current cbc.ca/thecurrent on Twitter @TheCurrentCBC or Facebook.com just search for CBC The Current. We're back in just a bit.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

From poutine to windchill: Which Canadian 'cultural intangibles' are worthy of UNESCO's recognition?

Guests: Randy Boyagoda, Katherine Monk, Drew Hayden Taylor, Danilo Lupo

PC: Hi I am Piya Chattopadhyay and you're listening to the Friday edition of The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

[Song: That's Amore by Dean Martin]

When the moon hits your eye like a big pizza pie that is amore.

When the world seems to shine like you have had too much wine that's amore.

Bells will ring, jing-a-ling-a-ling...

PC: Well you may not have known what song that was right off the top, but as soon as it came into the main part there it has been very very played out in the last number of years. It is the immortalise song. And now the Neapolitan pizza is being recognized by the United Nations as part of our global cultural heritage. To be precise it is not the pizza but the art of pizza making specific to Naples that has just been added to UNESCO's intangible cultural heritage list. The UN's cultural organization met this week to add 33 new cultural practices to its list. They come from right around the world but not from here in Canada. More on that in just a few minutes. But first we are sticking with pizza and our guest in studio is a certified 'pizzaiolo’.

DANILO LUPO: Yes.

PC: Okay. That is the title for a certified pizza maker who makes them in the Neapolitan style. Danilo Lupo is a master instructor as well as the head chef of Pizzeria Dafina here in Toronto hello.

DANILO LUPO: Hello good morning to everyone.

PC: What exactly makes a Pizza Neapolitan pizza?

DANILO LUPO: Well it is you know in the years they try all the soup to give a specific, like the weight to the dough balls or the type of flour, how you mix it, the time this does raise all these specific characteristic, the crust - how thick it is, the color, the temperature of the oven, how the oven is made.

PC: Okay so wait is what of a Neapolitan pizza compared to another pizza? Lighter? Heavier?

DANILO LUPO: It is 126 270 gram so can be for an average - average pizza usually is around 220 but it's the crust that really makes the difference.

PC: Okay temperature?

DANILO LUPO: Temperature that's around the temperature of the oven, and the floor is around 750 Fahrenheit and the fire well that's 1400-1500.

PC: Fahrenheit. So it's much hotter than the other oven.

DANILO LUPO: Yes. That what really makes a difference. That's where they come, the blisters from that fire, that wildfire.

PC: What about the ingredients is there anything specific that you have to have on a Neapolitan pizza?

DANILO LUPO: Yes absolutely. So they want to use sanmarzano tomatoes and the DOP they need to be obviously raised so grow in that specific area of the DOP classification. So that's what it really that's what it is.

PC: How old is this tradition of making pizza Neapolitan style?

DANILO LUPO: They start around 1925-27 some for late.

PC: And has it changed over the years.

DANILO LUPO: No no. No. Absolutely no.

PC: [Laughs] Okay.

DANILO LUPO: What really changed obviously in the years is how the mill, the process so the milling on the flower. Back in the day obviously they don't have that much technology saw the flour was a little more coarse than these days. But that's what it is.

PC: This is radio. It is hard to see visually so I'm going to have to explain some things. You are standing in front of a table. You've got a ball of dough and some flour underneath it. Okay. So let us talk about the dough of a Neapolitan pizza. First of all let's start with this probably is not the perfect surface to be making this on. What kind of surface do you need?

DANILO LUPO: Wow marble obviously is the best.

PC: Sorry we can't afford that around here [laughs.

DANILO LUPO: [Laughs] Marble is the best, you know it is able to absorb humidity now when you stretch it so it will not stick, the pizza.

PC: Okay. What is what is special about the dough and how you're going to mix it for the Neapolitan pizza?

DANILO LUPO: Well you need soft or wheat that's what you just need, soft wheat flour, yeast, salt and water. The most important thing is water.

PC: So with UNESCO making the Neapolitan pizza onto the Intangible Cultural list, it was actually for the art of twirling and spinning it.

DANILO LUPO: Well I think was more to recognize just the art, the pizzaiolo. That's what it really was. Spinning that was more like a modern things. The old those all the old guys, they didn't have the, you know the crafted, the modern, the new guys, the new generation has. So they're very rustic how they used to open their pizza and how to stretch this dough.

PC: What do you do? Do you stretch and spin and throw and roll and pin and all of those things?

DANILO LUPO: It is good for the show. [Laughs]

PC: It is good for the show. Is that the only reason you do? I thought you throw the dough in the air to get oxygen in the dough, was that not true?

DANILO LUPO: Well you know that's a myth. That's a myth. There's no scientific explanation for that.

PC: So you do it all for the show?

DANILO LUPO: Yes I do for the show.

PC: I don't know how this is going to go on radio but you do spin and twirl. I'm not making you do something that is unusual.

DANILO LUPO: No. no.

PC: Can you talk and spin and throw out at the same time? Can you scratch your head and rub your belly at the same time? [Laughs] Who wants to narrate? I've got other guests in the studio will introduce in a moment. You are - I don't know what is that called - spreading the dough with your fingers.

DANILO LUPO: Yes.

PC: Okay.

DANILO LUPO: You push. So you take it all the CO2 that it's inside the dough ball. You create the crust all around. Well I'm [unintelligible] I flip upside down.

PC: Okay. You are stretching it. That looks so easy. Oh here we go. Oh my goodness. Oh wow. Oh that's about what a foot near, wow behind the back. How are you guys all enjoying this at the home. I'm a great sportscaster telling you how...

DANILO LUPO: That is it then it breaks because this is a real dough to be you know to be served. Usually when you see a lot of playing around the [unintelligible] just make the gluten way more stronger you can play with it a very very long time.

PC: You are a master of this, right?

DANILO LUPO: Yes.

PC: How do you become a master?

DANILO LUPO: Well. You know you study you take courses and you get certified. You know that's what it happens. That's what happens to me. I get certified in Italy. And after when I came here to Canada start my own I start to work. I start in Pizzeria Defina and I had a side job was to teach to people. Now I am you know after six years I teach so many people and I've met so many people that always got weird questions. You know hard to explain. 'Why you do that? Why you do that?' Sometimes there's not really an explanation. You know it's just a craft than somebody someone told you would you do. And you go ahead.

PC: We started the part by hearing celebrating on the streets of Naples celebrating UNESCO's announcement. Does it mean anything to you to have your pizza making style on the list of Intangible Cultural Heritage?

DANILO LUPO: Of course he does. Of course because you know all the guys like me then they go around the world and you know they tried to make this product and you deliver every day a product you go every day online. And you know there's all other problems in the restaurants. And you try to go forward, to always deliver a very very good product and you make your customer happy. It's like playing an instrument you know. You go out there and that's your music. And people are out there to listen to you. That's essentially what it is to me.

PC: Danilo Lipo Thank you.

DANILO LUPO: Thank you so much.

PC: Danilo Lupo is a certified master pizza maker and the head chef at Pizzeria Dafina in Toronto. By the way we were videotaping that and we'll do some other video with him making the perfect Neapolitan pizza and we will have that up a little later today on our website at cbc.ca/thecurrent.

SOUNDCLIP

[Song: When That's Amore by Dean Martin]

When the moon hits your eyes like a big pizza pie that's Amore.

When the world seems to shine like you've had too much wine that's Amore.

Bells will ring ting-a-ling-a-ling ting-a-ling-a-ling and you will sing Vita Bella.

Hearts will play tippy-tippy-tay tippy-tippy-tay like a gay tarantella.

PC: I am Piya Chattopadhyay you were listening to the Friday edition of The Current. We're making pizza here in the studio this Friday because the Neapolitan pizza is one of 33 new entries on UNESCO's cultural intangible list. It is not the only one. So here are just a few of the other perhaps less familiar additions.

SOUNDCLIP

KAREN MARLEY: The Netherlands: the craft of the miller operating windmills and watermills.

PETER MITTON: Iran: Chogan, a horse writing game accompanied by music and storytelling traditionally played in royal courts and urban fields.

KAREN MARLEY: Greece: Rebetiko musical and cultural expression that initially spread among urban working class populations.

PETER MITTON: Armenia: Kochari is a traditional dance that is widely performed during holidays, festive celebrations and family ceremonies.

KAREN MARLEY: Bosnia and Herzegovina: Konjic woodcarving an artistic craft which includes furniture, sophisticated interiors and small decorative objects.

PC: So UNESCO defines its cultural intangibles as "traditions or living expressions inherited from our ancestors and passed on to our descendants." And the list now runs to 468 cultural practices from 117 different countries. There is not one single intangible from Canada. The reason is because Canada is not a signatory to the convention. Surely though we do have cultural intangibles worth of protecting and I'm joined by three people to kick start an effort to remedy the situation and get some Canadiana on a list, at least a list of our own. Katherine Monk is a freelance movie critic from CBC Vancouver and the author of Weird Sex in Snow Shoes and Other Canadian Film Phenomena, as well as Joni: The Creative Odyssey of Joni Mitchell. She's in Vancouver. Drew Hayden Taylor is a playwright, novelist, journalist and filmmaker from Ontario's Curve Lake First Nation. He is the author of most recently of Take us to Your Chief and Other Stories. And Randy Boyagoda to is a writer and professor of English as well as principal of St. Michael's College at the University of Toronto. He is also the author of an upcoming novel which is called Original Prin. Randy is here with me in Toronto, as well as Drew. Hello to to both of you here in Toronto. Hungry yet?

RANDY BOYAGODA: Yes no kidding.

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: We were talking about that.

PC: Catherine. Hello in Vancouver.

KATHERINE MONK: I'm hungry too.

RANDY BOYAGODA: Mine is a tangible hunger.

KATHERINE MONK: Mine is rather intangible.

[Laughter]

PC: Okay. You know it's very nice for our former guest and other people in Italy to have their pizza and the art of making it, Neapolitan pizza, added to their list. We got some stuff here that we want added to a list of our own. So let's start with that. Katherine Monk What is your ultimate Canadian cultural intangible that you would want to see on a list?

KATHERINE MONK: You know that's a tough one but I think there's one thing that is uniquely Canadian that is a true cultural intangible and that's the feeling that you have after eating too much Putine. You know Poutine is one thing but there's a uniquely - and it lingers it's like a gut bomb that lasts like two days if you have the entire portion of Poutine. So I'm going to go with that one the stomach luggage.

[Laughter]

PC: Okay. All right Randy Boyagoda what do you want to add?

RANDY BOYAGODA: Well I would say that the most based on the criteria that you just described from the U.N. is something that we inherit from our ancestors and pass on to our descendants. I think it would be the Canadian capacity to identify Canadians in American film and television.

[Laughter]

PC: Good one.

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: For me you were coming at it from the Indigenous perspective. I would like to nominate the lip point.

PC: The lip point.

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: In the West, depending what nation you come from, when you're indicating a direction to go or where somebody is, instead of pointing with your finger you point with your lips you go like:

PC: Again great radio.

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: Great radio I know.

PC: Like you're kissing but pointing in a direction.

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: But the interesting thing is depending which era you come from and which nation some point where there are lower lip and others point with both lips, and you can usually tell who's from where by how they point with their lips.

PC: Really?

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: Uhmm.

PC: Used all the time indifferent Indigenous communities.

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: Most out west yes.

PC: Huh. Lip pointing.

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: Yes.

PC: Okay, Randy what do you got for me that's more serious than Canadians in movies.

RANDY BOYAGODA: I was going to say wind-chill next but.

PC: That is good.

RANDY BOYAGODA: Let me think something more serious.

PC: Wait wait, let's talk about wind-chill for a second.

RANDY BOYAGODA: Well if you think about it wind-chill is a very strange thing right there. You know it's minus 28-29 but there's no actual kind of temperature marker identifies Fahrenheit or Celsius. But this sense that we have as Canadians that we live through this is hard and demanding climate and this presumption that no matter what it says in Fahrenheit or Celsius it's going to feel like minus 48 minus 49 wind-chill. What is wind chill?

PC: With the wind chill.

RANDY BOYAGODA: With the wind chill. But it's an intangible frankly, right? But we all seem to agree that it's something. And so I think it speaks I think probably to what it means to be Northern people in some ways.

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: It raises a collective burr.

RANDY BOYAGODA: Yes. There you go.

KATHERINE MONK: I think I think weather is sort of one of those uniting things you know 'death by exposure...

PC: We can't claim that we invented weather.

[Laughter]

RANDY BOYAGODA: We might have invented wind-chill.

KATHERINE MONK: The cold weather and our abilities to express how many ways we can be cold and the different cultural expressions that it manifests so like the 'bus shelter jitterbug' when it's like minus 40. You know there's a bunch of things the 'block shelter retrieval' trying to get the block heater court out of the grill. I mean there's certain skills that are uniquely Canadian, a result of weather.

PC: Okay. I would throw out their our ability propensity to say sorry. You know the times when we mean in the times that we don't that seems to be... I bring it up because it's kind of a cliché of Canadians and I want to ask about some other clichés; 'pond hockey', 'double double'. Should that be protected as are Canadian intangible cultural heritage?

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: Well like going through the list here I think the weather thing is very is very important too because I remember when I was in Florida in March we'd be all walking down in shorts and a T-shirt. But all the Floridians would have long pants and jackets and just going "Canadian". As for 'pond hockey' of course that goes without saying and 'double double'. I guess I'm not Canadian. I that's just too rich for me so I will step away from that one.

PC: I guess we you know we can talk about this it's sort of like what we hadn't been kind of fun and cutesy about it but more deeply and more importantly arguably Katherine Monk, do we need do we need to protect Canadian culture in a way that is akin to say UNESCO's List? Is there a need to do that in our country?

KATHERINE MONK: I think so because I don't think we respect what makes us uniquely different a lot of the time even though we're highly self-aware in terms of our Canadianness and 'hoser hoser hoser' and 'HBC Co' and all the things at Tim Hortons 'double double'. I don't think that we actually do treat it with enough seriousness I don't think that you know when I was looking at the list of those UNESCO intangibles I thought "wow there are so many things that we should actually have on this list". Most of them would be the result of indigenous cultures which we are so fortunate in Canada have as part of our cultural identity. But I do think that Canadians need this. I do think it's you know we're a young country and we don't have sort of these generations of lore to sort of give us our sense of cultural esteem. But I do see it changing I mean just even in the generations since I wrote Weird Sex in Snow Shoes I mean I feel that there's been this sort of solidification this consolidation of what does comprise Canadian culture and oddly enough I think if there's one thing that does unite us I think it's the art of compromise and compromise for the sake of inclusion.

RANDY BOYAGODA: Well I think listening to this it makes me think "Oh that's one of the things that are be at the top of the list is the constant search to define Canadianism". What was that quote about as Canadian as possible under the circumstances. You know this has been going on for decades. What does being Canadian mean to each individual. And I think that should be included in the list. Americans I don't think deal with this in the same level that Canadians do.

KATHERINE MONK: We wrestle with this.

PC: And often we would define ourselves as everything that is not American right. We do we just say "well we're not Americans". That is one of the ways we sometimes.

RANDY BOYAGODA: I think there is something to that in the question you put about about what does it mean to protect Canadian culture. I think we have two things we have to deal with. On one side is I think the encroachments of American culture right and the in our kind of capacity - for lots of good reasons are not always good reasons - to kind of want to consume American culture over and against the Canadian. But then on the other side a kind of rigid idealistic Capital official understanding of culture. And both of those I think we need to protect the creation, the meaningful creation of an active pluralist cosmopolitan culture. That self-critical that's searching for ways to kind of engage the fullness of Canadian experience in any number of different contexts. That doesn't kind of translate directly into a Canadian heritage moment or into well let's see if we can just sell it to Netflix and then we will pretend that St. John's is Portland or something like that right. There's there's something in between that I think is as active and open and as long as we can keep it that way, I think that's that's worth protecting. And that intangible in a sense right.

PC: Well it's interesting that you bring that up because we often you know are we say we're many cultures in this country. And that that in itself is could be seen as an intangible representation of who we are as Canadians.

RANDY BOYAGODA: Yeah but if you think about that list and I am frankly racking my brain you know throat. These very specific traditions right in all seriousness right. No carving or dances I mean those do speak to adapt than a history. And the question is what would be our equivalence. And you know I'm thinking, I don't know, I'm thinking maybe about sort of maple syrup culture, and all of the old things related to like tapping trees. Is there something there that's distinct unique? Is it some way of making a canoe? I don't know what it is. Is it that the traversing of waterways? I mean I don't know enough in any of those context to be able to point to something that's that significant cogent and distinct but really in all seriousness I and that's where we would look.

PC: Drew Haydon Taylor. It is interesting the point that Randy brings up we've sort all been hinting at before which is a fitting in cultures and intangible things and practices that predated Canada. Right. If you look at the UNESCO thing it says traditions are living expressions inherited from our ancestors and passed on to our descendants. How do indigenous cultures fit into Canadian culture?

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: Well the thing about indigenous cultures is the fact that a lot of people think of them as you said pre contact historical. But we're constantly evolving too. We accept, acknowledge and embrace what we used to be but a lot has happened since contact and we're moving into the future. That's why I wrote a book on native science fiction. My contribution to this, and I think everybody has sort of more or less comment on this, I would like to nominate the jingle dress dance. There's a whole series of cultural dances from individual nations that could all be nominated. But I use that jingle dress dance because it's actually one of the most recent the early 1400's. It was created and I think Northwestern Ontario or southern Manitoba somewhere up there out of a dream to save the story changes - whether it's a daughter or a granddaughter - through a vision of dancing in this dress made from 365 cones that actually saved this young girl. And so now you go to Powwows all across the country and one of the dances they have is the jingle dress dance. You will see jingle dress dancers all over the place. Now dancing and making a beautiful sound making beautiful movements. I've even seen the jingle dress dance in Germany when I've gone to so-called I'm using air quotes here German powwows. So I think I think the jingle dress dance for me would be my nomination because it's both an acknowledgement of the past and of the present.

KATHERINE MONK: It's also got the best name ever.

RANDY BOYAGODA: And it has jingle dress and has nothing to do with Christmas.

RANDY BOYAGODA: [Laughter]

PC: Katherine Monk, what do you want to add to the list that's somewhat more serious than some of the earlier things we were talking about like that gut rot you mentioned. I should not say.

KATHERINE MONK: Gut bomb. But I do think that compromise for the sake of inclusion is sort of one of those things again sort of playing to this multiplicity in terms of our identities which I think we should embrace. I mean Tatiana Maslany was the person tapped to play Orphan Black these multiple identities.

RANDY BOYAGODA: You know she's Canadian.

KATHERINE MONK: That is why she had to be. Yeah she had to be Canadian to play sort of this pluralistic character. But I mean look at the things that this pluralism has given us, not just this incredible nation but the all dressed potato chip and a national news broadcast with four anchors. I mean we have everybody is included all the time in this country.

PC: Okay. I want to get… you didn't add anything to the list, Katherine just so you know.

KATHERINE MONK: Okay. Rummoli. I will say Rummoli is an important sort of cultural thing. We invented that game.

PC: Rummoli. So some of us are raising our eyebrows going "Rummoli? What is that.

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: Is that a card game?

KATHERINE MONK: Yes a card game that Canada invented during the war. I play it every Saturday with my female friends. We have a blast. It's like got poker... again. It's like every game out there what...

DREW HAYDEN TAYLOR: When the moon hit your eye like Rummoli?

[Laughter]

KATHERINE MONK: Yes. It's like cribbage and poker. And I don't know like roulette all at the same time. And we made this game.

PC: Who is this? Like we in Western Canada?

KATHERINE MONK: Know Rummoli. It's like a Canadian invention it is a uniquely Canadian invention. I think it was invented in 1937 and yes it's played at cottages all over the country. And again there's a difference- like America had to go out there and invent its own version of Rummoli which bears no real resemblance to ours.

RANDY BOYAGODA: So they play it at the cottage with another Canadian invention, the Caesar?

PC: Not a Canadian invention mythical.

RANDY BOYAGODA: Really.

PC: But that is really that is for another debate and another time. Thank you to all three of you. It's been good fun and a good time to have you all here. Katherine Monk is a freelance movie critic for CBC Vancouver. She's also the author of Weird Sex in Snow Shoes and other Canadian Film Phenomena. She's in Vancouver. With me here in Toronto. Drew Hayden Taylor playwright, novelist, journalist and filmmaker from Ontario's Curve Lake First Nation. He is the author most recently of Take us to Your chief and Other Stories. And Randy Boyagoda is a writer and professor of English he is also principal at St. Michael's College at the University of Toronto. He has an upcoming novel it is called Original Prynne. Okay. If you can sit there thinking what you want to add to an intangible cultural heritage list; what Canadiana. You can tweet us @TheCurrent. Find us on Facebook or e-mail us by going to our website cbc.ca/thecurrent. Once you get there you can click on the contact link. That is The Current for this Friday. Stay tuned to Radio 1 for Q When Tom Power is joined by Bambadjan Bamba the actor who appears in the upcoming Black Panther movie. He has just gone public with a secret that he's been holding onto for a long time that he is an undocumented immigrant registered under DACA in the United States. The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program. He and Tom will be talking about that. Next up on Q. Sunday at noon you can catch me in my regular gig hosting Out In The Open here on CBC Radio One. As you may remember back in January, a shooting at the Islamic Cultural Center of Quebec City killed six people and injured several more. And this weekend you're going to hear from a member of the mosque who says those who pray there are still on edge.

SOUNDCLIP

Some have decided in order to continue to live and continue to attend the mosque, they have to kind of ignore the hatred because they are powerless to change it. And for the time being the state of affairs is what it is. It is the status quo of which the silent majority unfortunately is not very concerned of. So we live with this this fear that it can happen again. One of the reasons I didn't want to necessarily reveal my identity was just for my security and security of my spouse and my children. I think that for me is more important than the story itself because our life continues after the story comes to an end.

PC: You will hear more from him and others as I catch up with people who are central to Canada's top stories of 2017 to find out what life is like after being on the front page, after the media moves on. That's on out in the open this Sunday at noon. If you want to it on podcast or by streaming and find it online later today at cbc.ca/open. I'm Piya Chattopadhyay. Thank you so very much for listening and kind of watching today as we made pizza here in the studio. The Friday edition of The Current. Like I said earlier do get in touch with us. We do like communicating with you. So you can tweet us @TheCurrentCBC. You can find me on Twitter @PIYA, Facebook.com/cbcthecurrent and you can always e-mail us by going to cbc.ca/thecurrent and emailing us by clicking on the Contact Us link. Have a good weekend everybody. Anna Maria Tremonti will be back here with you on Monday.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

Friday December 8, 2017 Full Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This