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

The AIH Transcript for January 30, 2018

Hosts: Helen Mann and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

HELEN MANN: Hello. I'm Helen Mann, sitting in for Carol Off.

JEFF DOUGLAS: Good evening. I'm Jeff Douglass. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight:

HM: Cutting an un-fine figure. The City of Halifax votes to put a statue of its founder in storage. And the Mi’kmaq historian who raised the issue of Edward Cornwallis’s racist record 30 years ago is celebrating.

JD: Flying in the face of danger. The pilot who runs Afghanistan's biggest airline talks about last weekend's Taliban attack that killed nine of his colleagues — and left his company's future up in the air.

HM: A jury without peer. At the murder trial of a Saskatchewan farmer, the family of the deceased, Colten Boushie, are upset that there are no Indigenous members of the jury.

JD: It's not spontaneous, but it is off the top of their heads. In Iran, women are taking off their headscarves in public. And tonight, we speak with the organizer of an online movement to fight the country's mandatory dress code.

HM: The plot sickens. Too often in whodunits, whoever did it did it to a woman. So a British author has started a book prize to honor thriller novels that don't turn female characters into victim.

JD: And… not so far so good. Six months after her disappearance, a family pet turns up just a few hundred meters away, which means she was going top speed all the way because that pet is a tortoise.

JD: As It Happens, the Tuesday edition. Radio that would not declare this a runaway success.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Part one: Cornwallis statue, Colten Boushie trial, tortoise found

Cornwallis statue

Guest: Daniel Paul

JD: The statue of Edward Cornwallis loomed large in Halifax. Soon, however, it won't be looming — not at all. Because today, city council voted to temporarily remove the bronze figure, and put it into storage. Edward Cornwallis, of course, founded the City of Halifax in 1749. He was also responsible for the scapling proclamation — offering a cash bounty to anyone who killed a Mi'kmaq person. The vote at council came down 12 to 4. One of the dissenting councillors was David Hendsbee. Here's part of what he said in council today.

SOUNDCLIP

DAVID HENDSBEE: Why don't we put out front here, in front of the flagpole or perhaps out in front of the mayor's office? There’s a nice spot out on the lot. We should not be hiding our history. I know this probably not being fully told. Maybe we want to put other panels up and redevelop the Cornwallis Park whatever name Reconciliation Park; whatever the case may be. But we should not be putting the statue away. If we’re going to put him somewhere, let’s put him in plain sight that people can still appreciate our history. Maybe not all of it, but at least we’re not running away from it.

JD: That was Halifax councillor David Hendsbee, on why he disagrees with a decision made today to remove the city's Edward Cornwallis statue. Daniel Paul is a Mi'kmaq historian who has been calling for the statue's removal for years. We reached Mr. Paul in Halifax.

HM: Mr. Paul, is Halifax running away from its history as councillor David Hornsby puts it by removing the statue?

DANIEL PAUL: God no. Is Germany running away from its history by not having a statue of Hitler? The answer is no. OK, you don't need statues. Cornwallis, I've always advocated belongs in the history book. And anybody who wants to learn about him they can. And also, if they feel so inclined, put the statue in a museum somewhere. I can guarantee you I and no other Mi’kmaq in Nova Scotia will go see it. But if that's where Mr. Hendsbee would like to put it, by all means, do so.

HM: Why is this decision by Halifax city council to remove the Edward Cornwallis statue so important to you?

DP: Well, to me and to the Mi’kmaq, it's a symbol of white supremacy. This man decided to exterminate the Mi’kmaq on the peninsula of Nova Scotia in 1749. And that proclamation included men women and children, so why should a population be idolizing such an individual? It don't make sense. Same as in the south, and the Carolinas, and what have you taking down the statute of Robert E. Lee. The man was a slave owner and an advocate of continuing with slavery. So, finally, they're coming to their senses down that way, and they're removing the statues of this man.

HM: Now Halifax city council voted that the statue be temporarily removed and put into storage. What do you think should be done with it? You mentioned a museum. Is that the option that you prefer?

DP: As far as I'm concerned, they want to present the museum fine, go for it. As long as they have panels around to explain his heinous deeds he committed.

HM: As long as it's not on public display in a park. You can live with that?

DP: Yeah, the thing is that park is near Pier 21. It’s kind of a big tourist attraction around Halifax, and it's a greeting place that welcomed a great deal of immigrants to what's now Canada, and should be a place that has more inclusiveness. and you’d think the Mi’kmaq, the Gaels, or any other people that have been marginalized by systemic racism here in the province want to see the Statue of a man who was an advocate of white supremacy.

HM: We understand there was a planned protest for this weekend. Do you think that factored into the decision?

DP: I think maybe it has. And I think maybe the message is finally getting across. And Nova Scotia I think is making some progress in dealing with its racist past and it has a long way to go. Nova Scotia at one time was called by the African Nova Scotian population “The Mississippi of Canada”, so it’s a place that had the coloured sections and cemeteries and had a home for coloured children and an Indian residential school.

HM: The City Council vote related to an issue of public safety in voting to take the statue down and put it away for now. There were rumors that the statue might be forcibly pulled down during this protest. Can you tell us a little bit more about that?

DP: I know some of the younger people have grown rather impatient with the reluctance to move forward on an issue that should you know when you look at a situation where you have a man that plays at the bounty on the heads of a race of people. And by his own admission is seeking to exterminate them from the peninsula of Nova Scotia, I don't think it really have to go any further. He's part of history, and the history books should reflect that in it.

HM: I know Carroll spoke with you on this program a year-and-a-half or so ago about this. At the time, you suggested you know it might come down within the next ten years. Are you surprised a bit by how quickly this decision has been made relative to your expectations then?

DP: Well, I'm about it. Let's put it this way, I'm 80-year- old this year, and I was beginning to think I wouldn't live to see the day. So I'm happy that I’m here to see the day.

HM: Mayor Mike Savage of Halifax said this week that he has long seen the Cornwallis statue as an impediment to the city's relationship with Mi’kmaq people. Will it improve now that this effort is being undertaken?

DP: I think so. I think not only the City of Halifax is making a move in that direction. I think the Province of Nova Scotia has done considerable work in that regard and changing the curriculum here and talking about treaties now and you know begin to reflect some real history here, not the Eurocentric kind of being predominant throughout the past.

HM: Despite that, a survey that was conducted last fall showed that the majority of Halifax residents did not approve of removing Cornwallis’s name and memory as they put it from city landmarks. What do you make of that?

DP: I think if you had of conducted that survey in 1988 when I first started out in Cornwallis, you probably would have had somewhere 90 per cent to 10 per cent in favour of keeping the statute. So I really think that in a few more years, the vast majority will be happy with the decision to have taken it down.

HM: Do you know when the statue will officially come down?

DP: I think it's going to be in the next few days.

HM: Would you like to watch it come down or does it matter?

DP: Not really. I'm glad it's going and I don't have to drive by that park anymore and see it. I've done so over the years, and it always disturbed me to see sort of like a thumb in the eye of the Mi’kmaq people standing there as big as you please. I think it’ll be good news. It will be well-received as well around

HM: Mr. Paul, I appreciate you joining us again. Thank you very much.

DP: Thank you, and good, and have a nice night.

HM: All right, you too. Good to talk to you. Bye bye.

DP: OK, bye bye.

JD: Daniel Paul is a Mi’kmaq historian in Nova Scotia. We reached him in Halifax.

[Music: Bluegrass]

Colten Boushie trial

Guest: Alvin Baptiste

JD: A jury heard opening arguments in the trial in the death of Colten Boushie today in Battleford, Saskatchewan. Mr. Boushie was a Cree man. He was shot and killed in August, 2016. Gerald Stanley, who is white, is charged with second-degree murder. The case enflamed racial tensions in Saskatchewan. Those tensions have been inflamed again. After sitting through jury selection, the family of Coulten Boushie are concerned. Because they say all 12 members of the jury are white. Alvin Baptiste is Mr. Boushie's uncle. We reached him in North Battleford, Saskatchewan.

HM: Mr. Baptiste, the opening arguments in the trial started today. Is your family all there together to hear them?

Alvin Baptiste: Yes, my family were in there this morning. My sister was there, and my niece, and a few other family members, and a few other band members from our reserve.

HM: Ok, now it must be very difficult for you to sort of set out to hear all of this. How are you all holding up?

AB: Oh, well you know just sadness came over me when I was seeing that again. And looking at that and when I seen that blood and seeing his body there and like you know just an overwhelming sadness came over me looking at that again. And I felt like I wanted to cry to hear and see this. And I said Oh, my poor nephew, my poor nephew how he went through this. It just reopens the wounds again to see this again. And we can’t heal. It just seems to hang over our heads on this, and we're trying to move on in life here. But we have to go through this trial first.

HM: When did you realize that it appears there are no Indigenous people on the jury?

AB: My niece phoned me and told me about it. And she was crying over the phone. And she is very upset about it. And she explained what happened there at the jury selection. And she said there's no Indigenous people there; it's all white people on the jury. And then there I kind of felt like she was crying, and then I kind of got upset about it. And I kind of looked at it and I said oh, my goodness. And I said these are all farmers. And all these farmers are going to side with each other.

HM: Now let me just say to you CBC News has said that you know there's no way to independently verify whether any of the jurors have Indigenous backgrounds. How can you be so sure this is the case?

AB: Well, you just got to look at them. And once you see them like as First Nations people of our skin colour you know we have a dark tone. And, apparently, all of them are white. There's no Indigenous background on any of them.

HM: Do you not think it's possible for a fair trial if there are no Indigenous jurors?

AB: Me, I'm slowly losing faith in the justice system. Like as First Nations people, we just don't seem to get a fair shake in equality in the Justice that all.

HM: Why do you think this happened?

AB: I'm not too sure how they selected the people here. But I hear that they went through the card health card system and were selected that way. And you know I was wondering why there wasn't any Indigenous people in there? There's 30 per cent of the population in North Battleford are Indigenous. And you know what happened to the rest of the Indigenous people? You know, it's almost like it's set up.

HM: You said your niece was there when the jury selection process began. Did she see any Indigenous people that that might have been on the jury?

AB: Yes, they were there. Apparently, there were five Indigenous people that were there for that. And they were challenged and they were declined.

HM: The defense challenged them, and then they were not chosen?

AB: Yes.

HM: Representation of Indigenous people on juries has been a problem for a long time. Provinces, including Ontario, said they've tried to deal with it. Do you think that the Saskatchewan justice system is aware that this is an issue?

AB: This is an issue because you know they don't even chose us to be sitting in a jury when this thing happens. They have to bring us Indigenous people in to you know understand about the justice system and how it works. And see things in a different way of what's happening in society. But they do not bring us in there for that.

HM: Why do you think that hasn't happened?

AB: Well, I don't know it's probably because we're First Nations people — Indigenous people — and we still have a long ways to go to be recognized as who we are. As Indigenous people here, as we signed the treaty and when we signed treaties like this, the Queen — the Crown — promised to protect us, and use her soldiers — her military — to protect us first nations people. That's a breach of treaty right there. And not once have they upheld that obligation of protecting us at all. This is all Treaty Six territory; this is our territory over here as treaty Indians over her. And this land that they're living on right now is treaty land. And this land was to be shared. But they do not protect. Instead, their laws are used against us.

HM: Mr. Baptiste, thank you for speaking with us today.

AB: Bye

JD: Alvin Baptiste is the uncle of the late Colten Boushie. We reached him in North Battleford.

[Music: Strings]

Justin Trudeau

JD: The Prime Minister is trying to strike a sensitive balance. His government has introduced a bill to tackle sexual harassment and misconduct on the Hill. But he's also dealing with troubling allegations against a member of his own party. Liberal MP Kent Hehr was removed from cabinet pending an investigation over reports of sexual harassment. But Mr. Trudeau has not removed him from the Liberal caucus. Today, the Prime Minister defended that decision — first, however, he told reporters about his experience volunteering at a sexual assault centre as a university student.

SOUNDCLIP

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: Twenty-five years ago, I first got involved in the issues around harassment and assault by being a volunteer for the sexual assault centre of McGill Students’ Society as one of the few male facilitators in the program. I led conversations with fraternities, sororities, residences on issues of consent of power, dynamics, of date rape, of interactions of communications. But I am deeply pleased that after so much time, we have reached a point where the conversations being had in workplaces like this one are grounded, are leading to reflection and learning, and support for people, specifically women who have long faced systemic and constant discrimination sexism and harassment and assault.

MERCEDES STEPHENSON: Kent Hehr remains in caucus despite three separate women coming forward and alleging not only sexual harassment verbally, but now groping. Why is he still in the Liberal caucus, sir?

JT: We are, as we are saying, figuring out the transformations that we need to make in our workplaces, in our communities to go to a place of creating work environments for everyone that are respectful and appropriate. We are moving forward — as many organisations are now doing and are having to do — to establish processes where before there were no processes. Establish support systems where before there were no support systems. I don't have a rule book that's been handed down to me from Wilfrid Laurier as leader of the Liberal Party on how to handle these situations. This is new for organisations to have to deal with. And we are doing the best that we can on a case-by-case basis, starting from a place of respect, of support, of belief, and understanding that we do have to have fair process as we move forward.

JD: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, answering a question from CTV reporter Mercedes Stephenson earlier today.

[Music: Ambient]

Tortoise found

Guest: Leanna Morris

JD: She was on the run for half a year-and-a-half, well… on the walk. And actually, it turned out to not to be much of a walk at all. Last July, Tallulah the tortoise ran away from home. And her owners were devastated. But in a miraculous turn of events, Tallulah has been found. And it turns out her escape was not what you'd call "great": in six months, she had travelled 322 metres. Leanna Morris is Tallulah the tortoise's owner. We reached her in Oxford.

HM: Ms. Morris, how is Tallulah doing right now?

LEANNA MORRIS: Tallulah’s doing well thank you. She is still at the vet being fed three times a day to make sure she's eating. She's still very active as always. But they're just keeping an eye on her and checking that she’s eating enough.

HM: What kind of condition was she in then when she was found?

LM: She wasn't in brilliant condition, so her eye was really swollen, it was red, and it wouldn’t open. She’d lost quite a bit of weight. And she's very dark; her shell had gone like a funny colour. We'd had minus 9 — we never got cold weather like that. It'd been snowing; we never have snow. So she'd been out through all of it. And she'd been out six months, so considering what we've had, it could have been a lot worse.

HM: So take us back to July and Tallulah’s great escape. How did she manage to get away?

LM: Well, she was in the garden and I thought I had I call it Tallulah-proof in the garden, so she can't get out because she's quite nosey. She likes to go up to the fence and have a little look about. And basically what had happened is we'd had a fox in the night before. And I hadn't realized what she'd done was she'd gone out the foxhole and then she’d tunneled her way into other people's gardens, out the other side, through the front gardens, and off into the cold.

HM: So you said she's nosy. Had you ever had any indication before that she was trying to get away?

LM: If I have her out in the house and the back door’s open, if I can't see her, she’ll be at the back door looking out. It's like she can smell the fresh air.

HM: How long have you had her?

LM: I’ve had her eight years, so I’ve had her a really long time.

HM: It’s fair to say you're pretty bonded?

LM: Yeah, we are pretty bonded. So I felt awful when she’d gone. I felt terrible.

HM: What did you do to try and find her?

LM: I went looking in other people's garden. Because of her colour, sometimes she camouflage in and she’d blend with the trees and the grass and the weeds. So I went raking through neighbours’ gardens a good few times. I put leaflets out through people's doors. I walked up and down the road to see if I could see her, and looked for a good two-three weeks. She’s got a chip as well, so I called up them and I said has anyone handed her in? Has anybody found her?

HM: Right, so there's a microchip so that she could be identified and returned.

LM: Yeah, absolutely.

HM: So how was she found?

LM: It's my understanding that three little girls they were walking to a lesson, and they found her in the playground. The RSPCA came out to the school, and they scanned her leg. And then they said oh right, well her owner apparently lives around the corner. So she was reunited that way.

HM: How far away was Tallulah from that garden when they found her?

LM: If you were to cross the road, it would take you less than a minute to get to where she was.

HM: And it took her months we assume?1

LM: Well, about six to six-and-a-half months. Yeah, it took her ages.

HM: Do you have any idea what the speed is that she was going?

LM: I think the paper had written that it was 0.005 miles/hour.

HM: Slow and steady wins the race.

LM: Absolutely. She certainly did win the race. She hid well.

HM: Is Tallulah affectionate? Does she responds to you now that she's back in care?

LM: She's never been affectionate; she's quite stubborn. If you disturb her, she’ll often hiss and turn around and pretend she can’t see me.

HM: Do you think maybe she's not happy to come back?

LM: I'm sure she'll be pleased to be back knowing that she's got regular food, she’s warm, she’s dry.

HM: She can keep hissing at you.

LM: She can keep hissing. I'm sure if the back door’s open, she’ll have a look. I think I'll get a run for her so then I know she can't go out of it, but she can run the garden.

HM: She’ll be plotting her escape.

LM: I wouldn't doubt it.

HM: Leanna Morris, thank you very much for telling us the story. And I'm glad you've been reunited.

LM: Oh, thank you very much.

JD: Leanna Morris is Tallulah the tortoise's owner. We reached her in Oxford. And indecently, at her apparent rate of speed, it would take Tallulah 64 years and 47 days to get from Oxford to Reading taking the A-4074 Road. If you want to see a photograph of Tallulah, do go to our website. Go a little more quickly than Tallulah would get there: www.cbc.ca/aih

Back To Top »

Part two: Afghan airline, Bridget Lawless award

Afghan airline

Guest: Samad Osman Samadi

JD: The future of Afghanistan's most important airline is in question. In a country where the roads are often too dangerous to drive, Kam Air is responsible for something like 90 per cent of domestic flights. The airline, however, has relied on international pilots, flight crews, and engineers to keep its planes in the air. Many of those expats made their homes behind the security perimeter of Kabul's Intercontinental Hotel. Then, of course, last week, Taliban gunmen took over that hotel. They murdered 22 people, including 9 who worked for Kam Air. Captain Samad Osman Samadi is the airline's director general. We reached him in Kabul.

HM: Captain Samadi, how are you and your colleagues coping with the loss of so many of the people that you work with?

SAMAD OSMAN SAMADI: Yeah, not busy, not bust. This is a disaster for everybody. We lost so many people; we’ve been shocked since that night, and just left Afghanistan. So we lost only nine people. We lost more than 35 people on that day.

HM: What kind of effect is that having on all of you you know emotionally as you try to deal with this ?

SOS: Oh, it's very difficult, very difficult. I just came from the flight, I’m also a captain, I'm just covering all the other flights because we don't have enough captains at the moment.

HM: Where were you when you heard about the attack?

SOS: I was close to the hotel at that time. Having contact with everybody; we made a group a contact to just have contact with all of them.

HM: So you were close by, and you set up a contact circle so you could keep in contact with everybody at the hotel?

SOS: Yes, exactly.

HM: What kind of messages did you send and received during that time?

SOS: Usually, you are sending messages that everything is fine. But I was receiving messages that there is a fire on the first floor, there is a fire on the second floor.

HM: So people were responding to you at one point, and did the responses stop coming?

SOS: Yeah, that was a terrible time when we had a group of more than 35 people, so every time when recognized that somebody is just going offline, that means that he was killed or he was not online anymore. So that was very bad.

HM: You mentioned that other employees that are not Afghani that they have left the country many of them. What have they said to you?

SOS: They left the country because they were in shock. And they said we will come back, but we don't know when they are going to be OK or when they can come back? All of them were very professional guys like captains, co-pilots, engineers, cabin crew. And at this time, in Afghanistan, it's very difficult to find professional people.

HM: What countries do these people come from?

SOS: So many countries: from Venezuela, from Ukraine, from Kyrgyzstan, from Uzbekistan, from Greece, from so many other countries. We had so many nationalities here.

HM: How hard is it to attract those people to come and work with you?

SOS: It’s very hard. I think it's impossible at the moment, especially those attacks that happened after the hotel attacks. I don't think it's even possible to get those guys back or others who can even come back with the situation going on in Afghanistan at the moment.

HM: What does the loss of all of these pilots and other crewmembers mean for Kam Air?

SOS: It’s a lot, a lot — more than a million dollars. Can you believe that we had more than 37 to 40 flights a day? At the moment, we are flying only 15 or 20 flights a day. You can't even compare. It’s a lot of loss. At the moment, we’re just surviving. And we’re just canceling so many flights at the moment.

HM: What effect is this having on your customers?

SOS: Very bad because our schedule was disrupted badly because of these attacks. It's not good, it's not good.

HM: If Kam Air were to be forced to close — to stop flying altogether — what would that mean for Afghanistan?

SOS: I can assure you that Kam Air is not going to be closed. But for Afghanistan, it’s very important because Kam Air is the connection between all the cities between Afghanistan, especially in such a difficult time because nobody can travel on the road at the moment, especially people who work for the government. And Kam Air was just the connection between all Afghanistan. At the moment, we’ve lost so many cities that we cannot fly to at the moment because we don’t have enough pilots.

HM: You've said that it's difficult to attract people because the situation is dangerous right now for many people. Given that violence, how do you feel about your own safety? What's your feeling about the state of life in Afghanistan right now?

SOS: Not good, not good at all. I’m originally from Afghanistan, but I have a British passport. For us, I think we got used to it maybe. It's terrible to say that, but we got used to them. And everybody wants to live normally. But I'm 46-years-old, 38 years of was, so I got used to all of this now.

HM: Can you see a point in time where that won't be true? Is there any reason to expect that this will end?

SOS: Not at all. I'm thinking it's getting worse every day — day-by-day. It's getting worse; I don't see any future— any bright future.

HM: Well, Captain Samadi, I'm very sorry about the loss of your colleagues, and all the difficulties that you are going through. Thank you very much for talking with us.

SOS: No problem, no problem. Thank you.

HM: All right, bye bye.

SO: Thanks, bye.

JD: Captain Samad Osman Samadi is the director general of the Afghan airline Kam Air. We reached Captain Samadi in Kabul. And we do have more on that story on our website.

[Music: Sad piano]

Vic Fedeli

JD: Vic Fedeli had some harsh words for his own party today. The interim leader Ontario Progressive Conservatives said the party has problems. And that those problems were so daunting that he will not run to become its permanent leader, instead he is going to focus on the, quote, "massive undertaking" of fixing those problems. Here's part of what Mr. Fedeli had to say at a press conference this morning.

SOUNDCLIP

VIC FEDELI: Since I spoke to you right in this podium last on Friday, many things have changed. It has been a chaotic time for our party. And quite frankly, a steady hand is needed at the helm of our party today. In the five days that I've been there, I will admit to you that our party structure is in much worse shape than we knew. You've all heard there are concerns involving our internal reporting, membership lists, and the security of our information technology systems. Fixing this — and it needs fixing — will be a massive undertaking. But it is absolutely essential, and absolutely doable, if we're to win the next election. I've been at this five days as I've said, I have seen firsthand where we are, and I have already ordered action to be taken on our computer system, on our membership analysis, and our internal reporting. I'm giving you my word here today, that I will fix the problems in our systems. In my role as leader, and I will root out any rot that has been manifesting itself. Those are harsh words. I have always believed that we must put team before self. As such, I will work exclusively as interim leader to the party. It's time to put the party and the province ahead of any one person's personal ambitions.

JD: Vic Fedeli, interim leader of Ontario's PC party, at a press conference earlier today, announcing that he will not run to be permanent leader of the party. MPPs Monte McNaughton and Lisa McLeod also announced today that they will not run to lead the party. Doug Ford will though. Yesterday, the former Toronto mayoral candidate said that he was throwing his hat in the ring, saying he is, quote, “deeply troubled by what I have seen recently unfolding within the PC party.” Unquote. The leadership convention will be held in March.

[Music: Indie]

Bridget Lawless award

Guest: Bridget Lawless

JD: The darkest subsection within the fiction section of the bookstore is the thriller section, and not because of bad lighting. It's because a common, disturbing theme runs through thriller novels: the plots frequently revolving around women as the victims of violent crime. Well, now, an author and screenwriter in the U.K. is shining a light into that darkness. Bridget Lawless has created a new award. She is calling it the Staunch Book Prize. And for your book to win the Staunch, no women in it can be, quote, "beaten, stalked, sexually exploited, raped or murdered." Unquote. Bridget Lawless is in London. And that's where we reached her.

HM: Ms. Lawless, when did you come up with this idea for the Staunch Book Prize?

BRIDGET LAWLESS: Quite suddenly last autumn, well actually in late November. This kind of came out of all the Weinstein thing, the #MeeToo, the Time's Up, and my own decision not to vote for the BAFTA this year because of that. And then I was just thinking how can you keep the conversation going? And this was one small thing I could do.

HM: So it was inspired in part by problems within the film industry. But you've chosen to focus on thriller novels. Why that?

BL: Because they're a huge genre in themselves, it's something I could actually handle to receive entries for, and because they're so often the source material for adaptations.

HM: What do you think is the main problem with the storylines we see in these kinds of thrillers?

BL: I think there are several problems. One is that it's incredibly repetitive, and that doesn't encourage original writing. But that constant depiction of women as victims, and of quite gratuitous sexual description I think doesn't help anything about how women are treated or seen or how they feel about themselves in the wider world.

HM: How prevalent is this in that genre?

BL: It's pretty prevalent. I mean it's a very useful device I think to have women in that kind of jeopardy. And it's a bit of an easy get-out really for plotting. Through as particularly in crime thrillers I guess it's a lot more sexual violence as women as murder victims as well. But it's not entirely necessary to make a good thriller. And I'd love to see more work that’s just really more original. Really leaving that behind and coming out with some new stuff for a new era.

HM: Is it a problem in your mind more with male thriller writers?

BL: No, not at all. There are lots of women writing in this genre, and a lot of them write really quite gory stuff. And a lot of readers love it. But there are a lot of readers who don't, and I'm getting a huge amount of response from readers themselves saying oh, about time, and thank you, and I can't wait to read these books.

HM: As we heard in the intro, the prize will recognize novels where no woman is beaten, stalked, sexually exploited, raped, or murdered. What else will you be looking at when you're judging these books?

BL: Well, it's got to be good writing. We can't award a prize to a book that's badly written but a great idea. So yes, it has to be up there with the best kind of thriller writing, it has to be original and exciting, and still deliver everything that a thriller needs to deliver, but without falling back on that. Apart from that, it's a wide open field.

HM: But all the victims would have to be men? Because you can't even have a murder victim at all who's a woman under this criteria, right?

BL: Not in this prize, no, because we have to draw the line somewhere, and that's where we draw it. But there be all other kinds of jeopardy. And they can be psychological thrillers, political thrillers. So yes, of course, jeopardy, and danger, and excitement, and close calls, and all those kind of things, but it won't be you know a woman yet again ending up dead.

HM: You make an interesting point: I think a lot of us think about thrillers as always being murder mysteries. But they're not, right?

BL: No, not at all; it's a huge genre. And I think it feels a bit swamped. The crime genre swamps a lot of things, but I mean there’s always been great thrillers, and it's actually fairly recent that they become so gory and explicit and so reliant on sexual violence. It wasn't necessary in the “Golden Age” as they call it. And I'm not trying to go back there because I'd rather go forward and see what new things younger writers or older writers — anybody who's fresh to this — is bringing out now.

HM: There are critics of your award; one novelist told the Guardian that it's possible to write about violence against women without being exploitative. Why not honour those books?

BL: They have plenty of prizes to go for in that genre. And yes, it's possible not to be exploitative, but it doesn't mean that everybody wants to read that. And the readers that want something different need to be able to find it. And publishers need to recognize that there is a readership for this and pick up those kind of books.

HM: When will the price be awarded?

BL: At the end of November this year, to coincide with the International Day of Elimination of Violence Against Women.

HM: And when are you accepting entries?

BL: From the 22nd of February to the 15th of July.

HM: And is it for all authors around the world? Can Canadian writers enter?

BL: Absolutely, yes. As long as it's in English — any author it all — they can be published, unpublished, self-published and you know we just love to see underrepresented groups applying as well — if they're writing thrillers. I hope they are!

HM: Who's funding the award?

BL: Me.

HM: So you really believe in this. This is a big deal for you?

BL: Absolutely, yes. Well, I mean I haven't gone looking for sponsorship because that would involve a great deal of vetting of whoever it was. And in the current climate, that's risky. I started it myself so I’ve had to put my own money on the block. We will be crowdfunding for running costs. And people have actually called up from across the world and said I'd love to add some money into the prize pot. We'll see about that, but it's a lovely offer. And you know there's a lot of people who really want this to work.

HM: Can I just ask, you said it's difficult for you to seek funding in the current climate. What do you mean by that?

BL: Oh, I mean I can't risk getting involved with any corporation, or organization, or individual who might suddenly have some kind of scandal attached. It's tricky out there at the moment. And there’s been quite a lot of that happening in the UK with various things that have happened.

HM: It's not in the film and television industry, you’re seeing it in the literary world as well.

BL: All worlds, but because women are becoming much stronger about being able to speak out, and all of the industries are having to address sexual harassment issues. And you know beyond sexual harassment. It's really not comfortable for me to go looking for sponsors who I don't know their pasts, and I don't want this to be affected by anything that might come out later.

HM: So many complications now, huh?

BL: Yeah, in a good way.

HM: Yeah. Look, we'll look forward to seeing who wins this next November. And perhaps you will get some Canadian entries, we'll see.

BL: I hope so, yeah.

HM: All right. Thank you for talking to us.

BL: Thanks very much.

HM: Bye bye.

BL: Bye bye.

JD: Bridget Lawless is an author and a screenwriter in London. And that is where we reached her. If you'd like to know how to submit a book for this award, or find out how to do that, visit our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Pop]

Ferry McFerryface

JD: About ninety-four-and-a-half months ago, we all learned a super-funny new phrase: "I can't even". And for a while, we all couldn't even. But now you can't even use "I can't even" — because every joke of the moment eventually becomes a joke of the past. Another case in point: "Something Mc-Somethingface". In 2016, the U.K.'s Natural Environment Research Council asked the public to name a research vessel. A BBC Radio host suggested "Boaty McBoatface", and we all thought it was hilarious! And it went on to win the poll by a huge margin. The Research Council opted to name the ship after Sir David Attenborough instead. But the Council did agree to name a submersible "Boaty McBoatface". And then an Australian guy named his horse "Horsey McHorseface". And then soon, every public poll to name anything, anywhere, some wag would suggest "Something Mc-Somethingface", and we would all laugh. Then we’d laugh a little less. And now, it's not funny anymore. And the Transport Minister in New South Wales, Australia, has proven it. Last November, Andrew Constance presided over a public poll to name a new ferry in Sydney. After which he announced he was going with the popular choice: "Ferry McFerryface". He declared, quote, "This one is for the kids." But the kids "couldn't even" — and not in that good, funny way. A lot of them felt the joke was played out. And now, a Freedom of Information request by 9News in Australia has revealed the truth: "Ferry McFerryface" wasn't anywhere near the most popular choice. Mr. Constance had just decided to call it that, ignoring the real poll results entirely. Guess he thought it was still funny. Today, he issued a statement, saying, quote, "We always intended this vessel would be named for the kids. After a summer on the harbour, Ferry McFerryface will now be renamed after prominent Australian children's author May Gibbs." Unquote. And so, an abrupt about-face about McFerryface, and proof that, in boat-naming as in comedy, timing is everything.

Back To Top »

Part three: Iran protest, snow mayor

Kinder Morgan

JD: "Having run out of tools in the tool box, the government of B.C. is now grasping at straws." That's what Alberta Premier Rachel Notley said today after an announcement by British Columbia's NDP government. The BC government plans to restrict more diluted bitumen shipments — at least until studies are completed on the risks of spills. That means another obstacle for Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. Here's what the CBC's Khalil Akhtar asked B.C. Environment Minister George Heyman earlier today.

SOUNDCLIP

GEORGE AKHTAR: There's clearly some concern from Alberta this afternoon, Rachel Notley making the argument that this is simply not legal — this is not a constitutional position that B.C. is taking. What do you make of her view?

GEORGE HEYMAN: Well, I haven't seen her comments directly. Obviously, the Alberta government and Premier Notley want this pipeline and this transportation to go through. But what I would say to her and others is we're not doing this frivolously. We have a responsibility to act on behalf of British Columbians who want us to defend our coastline. We believe that we have the authority to protect our environmental interests pursuant to the Environmental Management Act, and that's exactly what we're doing. We will hear many submissions during the consultation phase I'm sure of that.

GA: What does this mean for the relationship between B.C. and Alberta?

GH: We agree on many things, and we should focus on those areas in which we agree. If there's ways to resolve differences that benefit Alberta without threatening the economy or our environment, I'm going to leave that to Premier Horgan and Premier Notley to discuss. But we were clear in our campaign. We've been clear since we were elected. It's part of our agreement of confidence with the Green Party that we will do everything we can to defend British Columbia from negative impacts of an increase in dilbit transportation. This is an important step toward that commitment today.

JD: That was the environment minister of B.C. George Heyman on CBC's “All Points West”, earlier today.

[Music: Folk]

Iran protest

Guest: Masih Alinejad

JD: Over the past few weeks, women in Iran have been taking to the streets — and taking off their headscarves. It's a symbolic protest against the mandatory dress code for women in Iran, which has been enforced since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Masih Alinejad spearheaded My Stealthy Freedom — that is an online movement opposed to the mandatory dress code in Iran. We reached her in New York City.

HM: Ms. Alinejad, why are some women in Iran removing their hijabs in protest?

MASIH ALINEJAD: Because hijab is the most visible symbol of oppression. For four years, women have been campaigning against compulsory hijab. But this time, it went beyond the online movement. And women are taking to the street, protesting against compulsory hijab. They know that they put themselves in danger. They know that it's a risk for them. But they want to be heard because they don't want any religion to interfere in their personal rights and personal life.

HM: There are actually videos of women who have removed their hijabs and hoisted them on sticks, waving them in the air. Do you know how much of this is happening in the country right now?

MA: At first, it happened from one woman called Vida Movahed. She put her white headscarf on a stick to protest compulsory hijab. The same day, she got arrested. But a day after, women started to support her. So it started on their hashtag #WhereIsSHe. In Persian, the hashtag was about where is the girl from the street. You know thousands and thousands people tweeted to ask her fate — about her situation. And then women started to do exactly the same as Vida did in the street. They started to put their headscarf on a stick and protest. I received a video from a woman walking in the street, bravely putting her scarf on as stick, and saying that we are fed up. We are tired from compulsory hijab. So let's get together and take off our headscarf in public, and make it like a flag in protest to compulsory hijab.

HM: What are the normal punishments if women don't comply with the mandatory dress code involving headscarves?

MA: That's a good question because you know some people even don't know that in Islamic Republic of Iran, if you take off your headscarf and you appear in public unveiled, you get fined, you get arrested, you get lashes, you will be kicked out from your school if you're unveiled. You won't be able to get a job. And I have to say you won't be able to live in your country if you don't want to wear compulsory hijab. So these punishments are happening in 21st century. And apart from these punishments, every day there are morality police there. And if you’re wearing a bad hijab or, according to them, inappropriate hijab, you will be sent to court. Or they’re going to warn you and arrest you. So that is why these women are now putting themselves in danger because they want to be heard. Because being a woman means that living in a dangerous situation every day, or carrying a fake identity. You know from the age of seven, when you don't want to wear a hijab, there’s the government putting you in this situation to be someone else. That is why I always say that when we fight against compulsory hijab, we don’t fight against a piece of cloth. We fight for our dignity, we fight for our identity, and we fight for our personal life. For having our own lifestyle and we don't want any religion interfering in our lifestyle. We're not against those women who want to wear hijab. But we don't want them pushing us in a situation to wear their dress code which we do not believe in.

HM: How much support do you think there is among average Iranians for these gestures, and for the idea of giving women choice in terms of what they wear?

MA: I see that now there are a lot of people supporting the girls from the street. And let me tell you, the most important thing is now men joining us. Because the government of Iran always wants to use men to you know apply discriminatory laws to women. They always say that if your wife, or your sister, or your mother do not wear Islamic dress code that means you are a dishonorable person. So now we see that men are joining women by putting headscarves on a stick in public and saying that we, the men of Iran, do not own the women. We have to support them because they are mature enough. How come they cannot you know make a decision about what they want to wear, or how they want to live, of how they want to choose their lifestyle? That is why I think the support is really important because it shows you that this society is supporting women's rights. It's only the government of Iran. It's only the Sharia laws. And the clerics in Iran want to put pressure on women.

HM: Why do you think this is happening now?

MA: You know because people are tired of seeing the government of Iran interfering in their personal lifestyle. Yes, we have you know the Sharia laws there for years and years. But now, there’s social media allowing people to be their own voices. And that is why people are using mobile phones like their weapons. The government of Iran have guns and bullets; they have money, power, prisons. But these people they only have you know social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter. And now they are allowed enough to tell the rest of the world that we don't want any restrictive religion laws, or Sharia laws, or the government of Iran interfering in our personal lives. Iran protest was about food, money, job. But the first day, people were chanting against clerics, against dictatorship. That is why I strongly believe these days, Iranian people want greater freedom. And they want the clerics to understand that this is 21st century, you can't ask people to follow the lifestyle they want.

HM: Ms. Alinejad, thank you very much for talking to us.

MA: Thank you for having me.

HM: Goodbye.

MA: OK. Thank you so much. Bye.

JD: Masih Alinejad is an Iranian journalist, writer and activist. As part of her campaign called My Stealthy Freedom, she's encouraging women in Iran to remove their headscarves. We reached Ms. Alinejad in New York City. For more on this story, tune in to “The Current” on CBC Radio One tomorrow.

[Music: Ambient]

Dateline: Flight runner

JD: Dateline: 40 km outside Tour-du-Pin, France.

[Music: Dateline theme]

JD: First, we crawled on all fours. Then, we walked upright. Then, we ran. Then, we figured out how to ride animals, invented bikes, and before long, cars and trucks. But some people like to keep it simple. They prefer to go back to basics right next to the cars and trucks. A British endurance runner decided to make the 170-kilometre journey to Lyon airport from the French Alps...on foot, wearing his headphones. But after just 40 kilometres, his plans went awry when he was spotted by gendarme running on the hard shoulder of the busy A43 motorway near Tour-du-Pin. According to the officer, quote, "We had the sirens on and he didn't hear a thing...We told him that it's forbidden, but he did not understand why". Unquote. The runner was forced to take an alcohol test before the police ushered him away from the highway. Luckily for him, he escaped the mandatory 4-euro fine, which, according to the officer, was "derisory compared to the danger he was in." Unquote. Remarkably, this is not the first time a British man has been caught running along a motorway in France. Apparently Britons have a reputation for running on French highways. The officer commented, quote, "It's odd that these people run on the motorway. It might be a national sport in the UK, but not here." So, in future, British runners, take the road less travelled. That will make all the difference.

[Music: Surf]

Snow mayor

Guest: Luis Miranda

JD: Luis Miranda dared to shovel. And now Luis Miranda is paying the price. Mr. Miranda is the mayor of Anjou, a borough within the city of Montreal. Last week, the city was hit with a heavy bout of freezing rain. And that followed a fair bit of snow. So Mayor Miranda sent out the snow-clearing crews to clean up. After all, the ice had caused slip-and-fall injuries across the city. But Montreal officials didn't send Mayor Miranda their thanks. Instead, he says, he got a letter of reprimand — and a warning that his borough might have to pay up. We reached Luis Miranda in Montreal.

HM: Mayor Miranda, what are city officials accusing you of having done wrong?

LUIS MIRANDA: My job — period. That's what I've got to say. I did my job. As mayors of you know our localities, of course, were responsible for the security of our constituents. And you know with snow we had last week and all that, we had to think about security. Security means mobility. People have hospital appointments, doctor appointments, whatever. If somebody has a heart attack, ambulances have to pick them up. And our streets —all of Montreal itself — our streets were not in good condition. So I decide to pick up the snow, and Montreal said no.

HM: So what's their specific complaint? That you weren't allowed to do that?

LM: No. Well actually here in Montreal, the way it works is the central city decides when we pick up the snow or not. And then they just went on a general idea, and they decided that no, we're not going to pick up the snow. The weather is going to be mild, and it's going to melt. They were announcing three degrees and three degrees for one day. That wasn't enough to melt the snow that we had.

HM: But they seem to think it was. Why did you think you knew better?

LM: Well, we did have the three degrees, and it did not melt. We did have the three degrees like it was scheduled, and it did not melt. Listen, you know after 28 years — I've been elected 28 years experience — and I told them last week I already told them you guys are doing a mistake. You cannot wait in January for snow to melt. You know the weather in Montreal is colder than in Toronto.

HM: I know that; I've been there and frozen to death in the winter, yes.

LM: And here I'm sorry. In January don't think about this snow melting. Maybe in Toronto — I don't know the weather in Toronto that much. But you cannot count on that. Yes, they did get the three degrees during one-day-and-a-half. But it wasn't enough to melt the whole snow.

HM: So what did the streets look like in the rest of Montreal after that slight rise in temperature?

LM: First of all, lakes. We have lakes because if you do not clean the sewers before you know so that the water will evacuate. Even if it melts, it stays puddles of water everywhere. There were a lot of puddles of water. And when the temperature dipped again those puddles froze and we had nice little lakes, which became nice skating rinks.

HM: What did the snow clearing operation that you approved cost?

LM: Well actually, it didn't cost us really anything because the snow removal is done by my civil servants. So I have no extra charge there; I pay them one way or the other. I paid them to go do whatever work they have to do. So on that case, nothing. Yes, I do pay myself for the machinery like the loaders and things of that to do the snow removal. The only thing that Montreal pays for me is the disposal of snow. We're talking about between 200,000-300,000 dollars.

HM: And aren't they coming after you, or threatening to?

LM: Yeah well, they're treating me that they're going to charge me that $200,000 or $300,000. At first, they said $500,000. And I'll wait and see because I know it does not cost $500,000. Listen, when we're talking about the security of your constituency, citizens pay taxes and all this. We pay police and we pay fire services to have an insurance to make sure there's no crime, we'll pay police. Even if there are no fires, we'll pay a fireman. Snow is part of the security system also.

HM: But do you think the city will follow through with that charge?

LM: Well, I think they're going to look bad. But even just thinking about it, I think they already look bad. Just thinking about it, I've been I've been giving interviews left and right today, and I've been getting comments and phone calls coming in the office. At a point, I know that there's one radio show they more or less told the person responsible for the City of Montreal that they should wake up and come and learn from us. So I think in Montreal they did a big mistake and they have to think about it.

HM: So what do your constituents say to you?

LM: Bravo. They’re all bravo. I would have elections tomorrow morning I'm sure to win.

HM: Did not the Montreal executive committee member Jean-François Parenteau criticize you; did he end up apologizing for being mistaken about the melt?

LM: Of course, he did criticize me. He's still criticizing me. Yes, and he did apologize for doing that mistake. But he's still criticizing, and he's still saying we shouldn't have done it, you know? If you go the wrong way, I’m not going to follow you the wrong way.

HM: If the city does come after you for that money that they keep complaining about, what are you going to do?

LM: We’ll see, we’ll see. We're not there yet. Of course, they could take the money directly out of our bank account because they are the ones that write the checks for our bank account for us. But I think it would be a big, big mistake on their behalf.

HM: Mayor Miranda, thank you very much.

LM: Thank you. Have a nice day.

HM: You too. Bye.

LM: Bye.

JD: Luis Miranda is the mayor of the Montreal borough of Anjou. We reached him in Montreal.

[Music: Blues]

Catholic school Inquiry

JD: In the 1970s, when he was 13-years-old, David Sweet was sent away to an Ontario Catholic reform school called St. Joseph. Now, Mr. Sweet is a federal Conservative MP. And he's calling on the government of Ontario to conduct an inquiry into the abuse he and other suffered there — and at other provincial training schools. In the early 1990s, hundreds of former students won millions in compensation. But Mr. Sweet says that award and investigation didn't go far enough. This morning, David Sweet told his story to the host of CBC Radio's "Ottawa Morning", Hallie Cotnam. Here is part of that conversation.

SOUNDCLIP

DAVID SWEET: Listen, I think if you take any young boy or young girl, in the case of some of these institutions, you take them away from their home and you throw them into a place where people that they don't know of violations of all kinds against them physically and emotionally. It's terrifying and it leads to plenty of mental health issues. And that's what I think thousands are dealing with today who are now adults.

HALLIE COTNAM: Did you personally face abuse?

DS: Other than being beat up all the time and being you know ignored when there was a fight and I was being beat up and the guards were just turned the other way — it was the easiest way for them to manage. So I think that's a clear sign of abuse. But there are many others that I was with who were abused severely; not just beaten, but were sexually abused. And, of course, that bore out in many charges that happened at St. Joseph's.

HC: Were you sexually abused?

DS: No, I was fortunate. There was a couple of occasions where I suspected that might have been the case and I ran from them. But I did have many of the boys there and I mean you can tell you know young boys are usually boastful about everything. But you can tell when someone's broken, and they've been violated, and they have trouble talking about it.

HC: I know that you were sent to solitary at one point. What was that like as a young teenager?

DS: It was traumatic. I mean the longest stint was the ten days after we had tried to run away. They brought us back in handcuffs, and they took us upstairs locked us up, and brought us out in the middle of the night, and made us run around the courtyard in March. We were fortunate it was a mild march in Alfred. But it was cold and raining; I think it was maybe plus two or three degrees. And we had to run around there what seemed to be hours. You know, of course, it was a time shift because it was so cold and wet. That was the kind of treatment that you got if you stepped out of line.

HC: You did not join other former students in seeking compensation back in the 1990s. Do you mind me asking why?

DS: I'd put it behind me. I felt that I knew many other people that had been there, and felt that they needed it more. I didn't want any part in the compensation. And I didn't speak up until now, until I realized that there is a great injustice still going on with the vast majority of these schools in Ontario where there was no outreach, no settlement, no offer of services, and the attorney general's office still says that they don't want to initiate any kind of inquiry. But yet, have offered nothing to these thousands — probably tens of thousands — of now adults who are young people who were harmed in many different ways.

JD: That was Conservative MP David Sweet, in conversation with CBC “Ottawa Morning” Hallie Cotnam. Mr. Sweet is calling for a provincial inquiry into abuses at provincial training schools, one of which he attended as a 13-year-old.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

January 30, 2018 episode transcript

More Stories Like This