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 February 07, 2018

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello I'm Carol Off.

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

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight:

CO: What's wrong with these pictures? Two Montreal sisters released a cell phone video of police shooting their brother, who they say posed no threat besides being short of cash, mentally ill, and black.

JD: Us too. A group of Canadian military veterans who experienced sexual assaults are calling out the Trudeau government for trying to block their class action claim.

CO: On the chopper block. As president of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte has been accused of horrific human rights abuses. So our guest says there's no way Canada should be selling his army 16 helicopters.

JD: flying in the face of the face you expected. British scientists make a bust of the head of the ten thousand year old Cheddar Man. And reveal that the oldest known Englishman was black.

CO: One small step for man, one giant leap back from “peoplekind”. After a kind of unkind response to his use of that word, Prime Minister Trudeau says he wasn't standing up for inclusiveness; he was doing stand-up.

JD: And from the minute he landed, his future was set in stone. A lonely sea bird named Nigel dies on a New Zealand island after spending years as the only living gannet among dozens of concrete ones.

JD: As It Happens, the Wednesday edition. Radio the guesses ironically he was unable to cement a relationship.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Part one: Montreal shooting, helicopter sale, Nigel The Bird

Montreal shooting

Guest: Will Prosper JD: In Montreal today, Pierre Coriolan's niece shuddered as they played the video of her uncle being shot. Mr. Coriolan was a black Montrealer who was in psychological distress when he died last June, after being shot by police in the hallway outside his apartment. Quebec's Independent Investigations Bureau is still investigating the shooting. But today, Pierre Coriolan's family launched a lawsuit. They also released smartphone video, recorded by one of Mr. Coriolan's neighbours, showing the moment the police opened fire. It is very disturbing video. And if you don't want to listen to it, you should turn down the volume for about 20 seconds now.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sounds: An altercation with plenty of Taser-fire and gunshots]

JD: Will Prosper is a former RCMP officer and a community activist who is serving as an advocate for the family of the late Pierre Coriolan. We reached Mr. Prosper in Montreal.

CO: Mr. Prosper, we have just heard an audio part of this very disturbing tape. And just listening to it is disturbing. What can people actually see in the video clip?

WILL PROSPER: Well, you see the last moment of Pierre Coriolan's life, of course, and you see Yakov all being Tasered in his apartment — actually, you hear him being Tasered. And then he's coming out of the apartment, and he's facing five police officers that are all stuck in a small hallway. And as soon as you see that, there's one police officer that fires three gunshots at Pierre Coriolan. And after that, the person that is taping the video he's going back into his apartment because he's fearing for whatever. And then he's coming back outside, and you see Pierre Coriolan kneeling down, just being shot by police officers. And he's saying Creole that he can’t have it no more — that's what he's saying. And one police officer says get down. And he's already on his knees, so what does it even mean, you know? That's what you have to question yourself. But after he's on his knees, there's a police officer that says, just 10 seconds after he was on his knees not saying anything else, and he just says shoot. And then he gets shot twice, and he falls down on the side. And there’s another police officer that will come with his baton and hit him twice on the side of his body. And you just hear Mr. Coriolan screaming. And after that, one-minute-and-three-seconds afterwards, police officers are asking is he breathing? And the other police officer says no, he's not breathing.

CO: When they go and when they actually strike him with the baton, what are they attempting to do? He has things in his hands they say.

WP: Yeah, because you have to understand you know if the person has been shot with a Taser you know it’s going to tighten up your muscle probably. So I don’t even know if that's the case, you know. So it's just on his side. And what's really interesting is that if you take a look at the video, there's a police officer that steps over his body. And if he's doing that that means a police officer is not being threatened in any sort of way by Pierre Coriolan laying down after being shot by a police officer.

CO: OK, but again, what was in his hands? They said there was a knife or a screwdriver they're talking about. What was he actually holding?

WP: We don't know what he's holding. The report mentioned that it might be two screwdrivers. But in the video, you also hear a police officer ask did he have a knife or a screwdriver? And one of them said it’s a knife. So it's probably one of them, I don't know if that's the case. But it doesn't really matter when you take a look at the video afterwards you know when he's on his knees you know because you know he's not moving, he's not going any places, he 58-years-old. He's somebody living in a tiny apartment. He’s somebody that was supposed to be kicked out, and he's been living there for nine years. So there's so many other questions surrounding what's happening in this case, you know? And he had three strikes against him when you take a look at Pierre Coriolan. You know the first strike was that he's a black man. And as a black person in Montreal, you're more likely to be killed by police forces. And the second strike was he's a poor person. So just being poor, you're more likely again to be killed by a police officer. And the third strike was the mental health issues. And because of that, you know he had three strikes, they took him out.

CO: But the police were called because he was causing a disturbance. The police say that he was breaking windows and destroying the apartment. You're a former police officer yourself, how should police have responded to the call that somebody was that was acting that way within their residence?

WP: Yeah, the first question that you need to ask yourself you know you receive a call as a police officer somebody breaking stuff in his apartment. OK, you can go all day it doesn't matter, you know? He's not threatening the life of anybody. That's the first thing that comes in your mind, you know? And once you attend to his apartment, you open the door, you just take a look, you see what's going on, and if the person comes out with a knife, you just close the door and back off. You can call the SWAT team, you can do some other stuff, you can talk to them or say are all right? We need to talk to you right now. You know this is the first approach because your body language is going to transmit some information to a person who is in crisis. But if he sees police officers yelling at him, having tons of weapons, it's not going to deescalate the situation. It's going to do totally the opposite. So maybe you know we should change or we need to change the approach that police officers have with people dealing with mental health issues.

CO: Can I just ask because you mention a Taser, you mentioned shooting, what was he shot with? Was he shot with plastic bullets? Real bullets? Do you know what the cause of death was?

WP: We’re still waiting for the coroner report regarding his death. But we can know for sure because the police officer said to the other a police officer he said I shot him three times. And these are gunshots that we are hearing. And when they're taking a look at his body, they're saying he's been shot to the abdomen. So yeah, Pierre Coriolan’s been shot. They don't say his name, but they say the person has been shot, so they’re calling for backup. And after that, there's even a police officer that says well, I have blood on my face. So normally, you know plastic bullets doesn't splatter blood on your face or anything like that, you know? And normally, a Taser gun doesn't do that as well. So he has been hit by a firearm. And after that, you can see the person you know using the plastic bullet and shooting at him. And it’s very important to understand that you know these weapons — these plastic bullets — the manufacturer says that they have to be 20 metres away from the person when they're shooting at him. And in this video, they’re about ten feet away from Pierre Coriolan, so it does even more damage to him.

CO: You were at the news conference today with Mr. Coriolan and his niece. And the lawyer said his two sisters found it too hard to even attend. But they have filed a lawsuit, after seeing what this video shows. What are they asking the courts to do?

WP: Well, actually, they’re suing the city. And what they're really asking and for them you know I spoke to them — I've talked to them — and since the get go, what was really important for them it wasn’t the amount of money, it was very important for them to make sure that another life isn’t 0taken away like the one that they have lost from a father, from a close one, from somebody they love. And from watching this video, they said they were traumatized, of course, from watching this video. But they’ve said you know this video has to be released because we need to be having these conversations. And we need to know that this is going on here in Canada, not just in the United States. And we are facing this situation. And we need to make sure that we are preventing the next person from being shot and killed by a police officer. And it needs to start right now.

CO: Mr. Prosper, thank you very much in speaking with us.

WP: Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

JD: Will Prosper a former RCMP officer and a community activist. He is serving as an advocate for the family of Pierre Coriolan. We reached Mr. Prosper in Montreal.

[Music: Folk]

Helicopter sale

Guest: Helene Laverdiere

JD: He's claimed to have thrown a man to his death from a helicopter. And now he's buying sixteen helicopters from Canada. President Rodrigo Duterte has been accused of human rights abuses in his pursuit of drug dealers and gangs in the Philippines. And when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau raised the issue with him in November, President Duterte told Mr. Trudeau he should mind his own business. And yet, today, Canada is doing business with him: selling 16 utility helicopters to the Philippine army. And NDP foreign affairs critic Helene Laverdiere says the deal is unjustifiable. We reached Ms. Laverdiere in Ottawa.

CO: Ms. Laverdiere, what is wrong with selling these helicopters to the Philippines?

HELENE LAVERDIERE: It's absolutely incredible. I mean the Philippines has a human rights record that is abysmal. The president of the Philippines has said once seemingly, there’s been serious reports on that, that he had already thrown somebody out of a helicopter, and was ready to do it again. So I hope it won't be from Canadian helicopters. We should have a system in place. We should stand up for basic principle, including the Defense of Human Rights. And this doesn't sit at all.

CO: Ok, but why? Tell us specifically. We know that President Duterte of the Philippines makes quite extraordinary statements of this nature. What can you point to is the problem with selling these helicopters to the Philippines?

HL: Well, there have been attacks on villages by the Philippines army. The range of issues with respect for human rights is huge. Normally, we're not supposed to export arms or equipment if there is a risk that it can be used to commit abuses of human rights. In this case, I think there are serious risks. And this seemingly has not been evaluated at all because from what we understand, the deal was arranged between the Department of Defense and the Philippines army. I mean it's not helicopters that are provided to a civilian organization, it's provided to the Army of the Philippines.

CO: Right, but how do you figure that Global Affairs Canada said in an email on Tuesday that the helicopters will be used for, quote, “Disaster relief, search and rescue, passenger transport, and utility transport”?

HL: Well, how can the guarantee that? And that's the issue. And right now, our rules say that we can export normally arms and things like that only if we are confident that there's no reasonable risk that they will be used to commit crimes and violations of human rights. Now, I think that in this case, some sort of statement coming from the government of Philippines saying oh, we will use it for research and rescue when that kind of things is not sufficient guarantee. And to my knowledge, there has been no assessment, no evaluation. So the government always says you know we have a strong control system, but the system is leaking from everywhere.

CO: We should point out that what has been reported is, in fact, that the Philippines military chief of plans has actually told journalists that the helicopters will be used for the military's internal security operations.

HL: And what does that mean? So there's huge questions on that, and I don't think that this deal could go ahead like that without a proper evaluation, especially to a country where we know that there are serious human rights problems.

CO: But we know that last summer, in 2017, the Philippines announced — President Duterte —announced that they’re are going to start buying military equipment in order to fight a wars they're fighting actually on two fronts: one with Islamic extremists, and the other with Maoist-led rebels. Is it not legitimate for them to procure equipment and supplies even from Canada if they're fighting a war?

HL: If they are fighting against extremists, they have a right to fight against the extremists. The problem is that we know that the fight goes well beyond that. With villages you know being bombarded, with extra judicial killings, and arrests. It's not a situation where we can feel secure that we won't risk being complicit, or that our equipment won't be complicit to human rights abuses.

CO: And what if they say it will not be, just as we have heard from other countries, including Saudi Arabia, an insistence that whatever they procure is not will not be used in human rights violations? If they make that commitment, is that OK with you?

HL: If they make that commitment, and we can follow, and we can watch, and we can assure that that commitment will be respected, then we can do it. But in this case, we don't have those assurances. And you know we have our own government who says oh, you know we're going to better control our arms export and not doing it. And they show themselves that it's so easy to have nice words and to do something different.

CO: You are from Quebec; you know that these are jobs that Quebeckers need. This will be going to Meribel — the construction of these helicopters. What do you say to people in Quebec who are saying well look, let's take a chance on this, we need this work?

HL: Yes, people do need that work. And it's very important, but you know in the last ten years or so, we've moved away from exporting equipment mainly to NATO allies, towards exporting equipment more to the Middle East for countries like the Philippines. So I think we should refocus our export in markets that respect our values and our principles. And also, there's always our own army who you know lacking equipment very often. So maybe the government would give help in that respect. So we shouldn't stop selling helicopters, but we should be very careful where we send them.

CO: All right. We'll let you get to Question Period. Ms. Laverdiere, thank you.

HL: Thank you.

CO: Bye bye.

HL: Bye bye.

JD: Helene Laverdiere is the foreign affairs critic for the NDP. We reached her earlier today in Ottawa. And after that interview, the minister for international trade gave reporters an update. Francois-Philipe Champagne says he has asked for a review of the deal, after a senior military official in the Philippines said the helicopters will be used for, quote, “internal security”. For more on this story, go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Cultural]

Trudeau is not funny

JD: Justin Trudeau admits it: he's not funny. But he does appear to deny that he's the enemy of all mankind. And that should come as a relief — but probably won't — to the fair and balanced folks at Fox News. They've been outraged by Mr. Trudeau's response to this woman at an event last week.

SOUNDCLIP

WOMAN: We came here today to ask you to also look into the policies that religious charitable organizations have in our legislation so that it can also be changed because maternal love is the love that's going to change the future of mankind.

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: We like to say peoplekind, not necessarily mankind because it more inclusive.

JD: That was Justin Trudeau in Edmonton last week. At the time, the crowd just laughed. But Mr. Trudeau's critic knew this was a serious. It was a serious issue. And by yesterday, they'd declared his choice of nouns to be an existential threat. In the UK, Piers Morgan — renowned for his measured responses to everything — summed it up with this headline in the Daily Mail: "How dare you kill off mankind, Mr. Trudeau, you spineless virtue-signalling excuse for a feminist." Well, this morning, the Prime Minister explained the whole business like this.

SOUNDCLIP

JT: You all know that I don't necessarily have the best track records on jokes. I made a dumb joke a few days ago that seems to have gone viral in the room and the peoplekind comment. It played well in that room and in context. Out of context, it doesn't play so well. And it's a little reminder to me that I shouldn't be making jokes, even when I think they're funny.

JD: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in Ottawa this morning.

Nigel The Bird

Guest: Chris Bell

JD: He died as he lived: confused and alone. Nigel the lonely gannet — also known as Nigel No Mates — the yellow and white seabird who lived tragically alone on Mana Island off the coast of New Zealand, has died. He was surrounded by what constituted his friends and family: the concrete bird replicas that baffled him for years. Department of Conservation ranger Chris Bell observed Nigel's life on the island. We reached Mr. Bell on Mana Island.

CO: Chris, how did Nigel end up on Mana Island?

CHRIS BELL: Nigel came here I think just before me in late 2015. So he arrived on the island, and he was drawn to Mana Island intentionally really because we'd — New Zealand’s Department of Conservation and the Friends of Mana Island had placed a number of concrete gannets — like a fake decoy colony — on the island, along with some sound speakers which replicated the noise from a gannet colony. And I was done with the intention of drawing real-life gannets to the island with the hope of establishing a real breeding colony. A Nigel was our pioneer; he was he was the first to arrive.

CO: But not just the first. I mean it was for years Nigel lived alone with his concrete friends, is that right?

CB: Yeah, he was the first, but he was also the only gannet to arrive. Actually, the project had been going for 15 years before Nigel without any success whatsoever. So we were really starting to lose hope at that point that we would ever get a gannet. And then Nigel showed up, which of course, renewed hope. But then, for the next few years, he continued to be the only gannet, which was certainly Sad for Nigel.

CO: I would think. And so what kind of relationship did have with his concrete friends?

CB: Well, he developed a very close relationship. In the absence of real gannets, he really made the most of it. And he found a bird he particularly liked and got on with a concrete replica. And he built a nest beside her, under her nose. And he began to woo her, so he began courting her, he preened her, he was, apparently, seen to get even friendlier with her, and that was their relationship. And that kept him in the colony for years to come.

CO: Did Nigel not realize is that his friend — his mate — wasn’t alive?

CB: It's hard to tell. I always found it a particular tragedy in it and that he really got nothing back. His mate didn't reject him, she didn't accept him, she just sat there. So whether Nigel was a pioneer, or whether he was just a little bit dimwitted, it's really hard to tell; maybe a combination of both.

CO: How lifelike were these concrete gannets that he hung out with?

CB: They were pretty lifelike. So we went through several models of decoy gannets. And I think the first ones were fiberglass. And because they were fiberglass, they were moulded extremely well, and just every detail was perfect. But Mana Island is in the region of Wellington, and Wellington is famous for being a very windy place. So these fiberglass birds tended to blow away. So we went for concrete gannets. Being concrete, it was a little bit less well-moulded. But painted really beautifully, and painted originally by local school kids.

CO: And, obviously, well enough that Nigel believed they were real. Or at least I mean if you say he was possibly dimwitted and didn't realize. But he was convinced?

CB: He was convinced. But the wonderful thing about having Nigel in the colony then was that we had a real, live, breathing, moving, interactive gannet. We hoped if further gannets did come after Nigel, then they would feel more comfortable to follow a pioneer like him in setting up shop on Mana Island.

CO What was his life like?

CB: So Nigel is an Australasian gannet, and they are long-lived and long-travelled birds. So Nigel would disappear for periods of time. And presumably, he was out fishing in the wide open ocean, either Tasman Sea, or the Pacific Ocean. And then he would come in really regularly and spend half a day, a day, a couple of days sitting with his concrete mate. Sometimes he'd just be resting, and sometimes he'd be talking in court with this concrete mate.

CO: But there were times though — and recently — when some real gannets showed up, right?

CB: yeah, Nigel had been around a few years. We were getting a little bit desperate. We wanted to help Nigel’s situation, as well as our original aim of creating a breeding colony here. And so we decided to try and tweak and maximize our chances. We knew that Nigel wasn't going to last forever, but at the same time, we knew he was our great asset. And if we were going to get a real colony going, we had to do it within Nigel's lifetime. So the birds were repainted, and we made efforts to try and match the colours and be a bit more artistic. And then I think most crucially, we have two loud loudspeakers, and they broadcast the noise of the gannet calling out over the ocean. So we moved the speaker closer to the ocean so they were pointing right out over the sea. And only ten days after we finished that, three other gannets suddenly arrived in the colony, which felt miraculous to us. So, suddenly, we had four birds in the colony, and our hopes were just massively increased by this.

CO: And what happened? Did Nigel take up the real gannets? Or did he stay with his concrete friends?

CB: I guess so when the story gets to be a little bit sad. So the three new birds came into a separate section for Nigel, and the three sat together, and they would interact, and seemed to talk together. But Nigel never acknowledged them. He stayed up on top with his concrete mate, and gave them no attention whatsoever. So sadly, only a month after the new gannets had arrived, we found Nigel dead in the colony.

CO: That's a very sad ending to this story. But at least we can say Nigel was truly his first love?

CB: Yeah, well, we can. Or he seemed to be. And going up there and finding Nigel dead was not just sad but really annoying because it just seems to be the wrong end. After years of being there in the colony by himself, this seemed to be the moment that Nigel should have the chance to find a real mate and to breed. But he did leave this legacy to the gannet colony in that, as far as we're aware, he was a big part of the draw that brought those other birds in. He may not have acknowledged them, but I think when those birds arrived in the colony and saw these concrete gannets, they also saw Nigel, and he helped to convince them that this was a bona fide place for gannets to stop and consider as a breeding ground.

CO: And for that, he will always be remembered.

CO: Hopefully, yes.

CO: Chris, it’s quite the story. I appreciate you telling it to us.

CB: My pleasure.

CO: Take care of yourself.

CB: Thank you, you too.

CO: Bye bye.

JD: That was Department of Conservation ranger Chris Bell. We reached him on Mana Island, New Zealand. And for a peek at poor Nigel, go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

Back To Top »

Part two: Veterans sexual misconduct, Cheddar Man

Veterans sexual misconduct.

Guest: Amy Garham

JD: A group of veterans is trying to get their day in court. Its members say the Canadian military failed to protect them from sexual assault and harassment during their service. Government lawyers, however, are fighting the class-action lawsuit — and are now trying to stop it from being certified. The vets say the government's stance is confusing, given that Prime Minister Trudeau has repeatedly said he supports victims of sexual harassment and assault. Amy Graham is one of the suit's lead plaintiffs. We reached her in Ottawa.

CO: Ms Graham, in your mind, what is wrong with the fact that government lawyers are continuing to fight against your class-action lawsuit?

AMY GARHAM: Well, I think the obvious is that they are coming out and supporting the victims — the sexual assault victims, sexual harassment victims. And at the same time, they're also fighting us. And that's rather contradictory. Their words are not matching their actions.

CO: Can you tell us a bit more about that contradiction? In what way are they supporting victims and people who are bringing this forward?

AG: Well, it's more of a verbal support that they're giving. As we know, the prime minister was in Davos about a week and a half ago, and when he was speaking to other countries he was talking about the #MeeToo movement, Women’s March, and say you know hire women, be on the lookout for sexual allegations, and take them seriously. And then we had the three politicians within the span of about a week all resign because of allegations. And again, he came out and said you know it takes courage to come forward, and we support you coming forward. And while he's saying this, at the same time, the government lawyers are telling us they don't even have a duty to protect us from being harassed or assaulted at work.

CO: And that's not an exaggeration. The words are that, “The government does not owe a private law a duty of care to individual members within the Canadian Forces to provide a safe and harassment free work environment or to create policies to prevent sexual harassment or sexual assault.” So kind of a contradiction there, is that what you're pointing out?

AG: Absolutely. And that statement is directly from the legal document sent by the government lawyers to our lawyers.

CO: Let's just play what Mr. Trudeau has to say about this contradiction. Here's the prime minister.

SOUNDCLIP

JT: The news this morning that there are concerns about what the Justice Department is arguing in the sexual harassment case around the military is something that is of concern to me. And I’ve asked the attorney general to follow up with the lawyers to make sure that we argue things that are consistent with this Government's philosophy. Obviously, the lawyers have been arguing does not align with my beliefs, or what this government believes.

CO: All right, that's what Mr. Trudeau has to say today. What would you say to him?

AG: I am, first of all, concerned that he's not aware of what the government lawyers are putting forth in their argument against us. You know we have launched our lawsuit against the Department of National Defense. Obviously, that is part of the government. And he seems completely unaware that this is what the lawyers are saying. And Sajjan as well, the defense minister, also seems completely unaware. And he's saying to the victims still come forward. We still support you coming forward.

CO: But they are lawyers, and their job, I guess, is to challenge things, and to test claims. Are they just doing their jobs?

AG: I don't think that they're necessarily doing their jobs well. Because, yes, they are lawyers, and they are fighting this lawsuit, but they are doing it on behalf of the government. And what they're fighting isn’t in sync with what the prime minister and a number of other politicians are saying is their policy. So if you're fighting on behalf of a person or entity, you should be fighting based on their position.

CO: Can you tell us a bit about the case? In 2010, I know you were sexually assaulted by a superior during a military rest stop coming back from Afghanistan — you were in Cyprus. And that man was court-martialed; he pled guilty to one count: disgraceful conduct. What are you alleging the military did wrong? What's the purpose of the suit that you've launched?

AG: I think from the very beginning of even arriving in Cyprus, the military failed me. They sent only two women with over 120 men. The other female was put up in a room with her boyfriend paid for by the government, which left me to be the only single female in the hotel. And I think somebody within my chain of command should have recognized how vulnerable the position I was put in. Also, I reported it to my chain of command immediately after it happened. And they did talk to Chapman, who did try to apologize to me for his actions. But they never took it beyond that. My chain of command never told me to report it. They never reported it elsewhere. And so I think it was just one ball drop after the other.

CO: What did you experience — what did going through this — tell you about how sexual assault, sexual harassment is regarded within the military? What effect does it have when you try and take one of these complaints someplace?

AG: Well, for example, when I was talking to the acting RSM about my assaults, right after that conversation, that same man made an inappropriate sexual remark about one of my female colleagues. And at that point, I knew that there was no point in me coming forward when I was in the military because the problem was so widespread that you know trying to have one person charged for his actions wasn't going to fix the issue.

CO: Now, what are you hoping to get out of launching this class action suit?

AG: We're hoping to get to a negotiation table with the government and with the DND to maybe iron out a few issues with up-honour .And really sort of discuss back and forth, and compromise something that's better for everybody.

CO: We will be watching your case. Ms. Graham, I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

AG: Thank you.

JD: We reached Amy Graham in Ottawa.

Australian MP

JD: In a bid to fend off government attacks, Susan Lamb is speaking out. Ms. Lamb is an Australian Member of Parliament. And she's one of many politicians facing challenges over her eligibility to sit in parliament, due to questions of her citizenship. Dual citizens aren't allowed to be MPs in Australia. And over the past few months, the Coalition and Labour parties have subjected each other's members to intense scrutiny over that issue. Last week, Labour MP David Feeney became the 10th politician to be unseated. Earlier today, Susan Lamb gave a speech in front of the House of Representatives. The Labour MP has a British father and an Australian mother. And during her statements, she told a story from her childhood, explaining why she could not access key papers that would determine whether she is a dual citizen or not.

SOUNDCLIP

SUSAN LAMB: I remember there being a small store and a petrol bowser out the front. A car turned up; I remember that part. My mother got out, words were exchanged, and then my mother drove away. My dad was not a single parent, an amazing man, whose example I try and live up to every day of my life. Now, my mother wasn't that my seventh birthday, the birthday after that. She wasn't there to help when I brought my fourth son home from hospital to meet his brothers. She wasn't there for my school graduation. She wasn't there for my youngest son’s graduation just last year when he was 17. In fact, they have never met. She wasn't there to help me campaign. She wasn't there to celebrate when we won, or support me when I needed it. Many years ago, we made an attempt to build a relationship, but regrettably, that failed. Now, I don't know what was going on in my mom's life back then. I don't know when she dropped me off and never came back what was going on? I don't know what's going on in her life now? I have no idea. The fact is we don't have a relationship. I imagine she carries her share of pain and trauma. And if it's anything like mine, I wouldn't wish that anybody. I don’t speak about this trauma. So when people ask me why I couldn't just call my mother, well this is why. I hope this story gives you the answer.

JD: That was Australian Labour MP Susan Lamb, speaking in Parliament today. After Ms. Lamb's speech, Human Services Minister Michael Keenan said he understood her personal circumstances. However, he said, quote, "We have had members in very similar positions and ultimately they referred themselves to the High Court." Unquote.

Cheddar Man

Guest: Yoan Diekmann

JD: He is known as "Cheddar Man." He is not the world's most delicious superhero. He is the oldest man in Britain — at an age of approximately 10,000 years old. Cheddar Man's bones were found in England's Cheddar Gorge in 1903. They're the oldest known human remains in the UK. Now, we know what Cheddar Man looked like. A full DNA analysis of his remains has allowed scientists and artists to re-construct a life-like, 3D-printed bust of his face. And contrary to previous assumptions, the first known Englishman was not white. He was black. Yoan Diekmann is a computational biologist at University College London. He was part of the team that analyzed Cheddar Man's DNA. We reached him in London.

CO: Mr. Diekmann, what did Cheddar Man look like?

YOAN DIEKMANN: Well, so what we did is to sequence his genome. And that allowed us to look at positions in the genome that code for skin pigmentation, hair colour, eye colour, and, to a lesser extent, also hair morphology. And we found that he had dark skin, brown hair, blue eyes though, and most likely a slight curl. And that was a genetic sight that we passed on to the to the Kennis brothers, which are palio artists from Holland. And they took this information and the actual skull and made this wonderful image of him. And this is the best guess that we have how he may have looked.

CO: It's an amazing 3D image. It's just he’s quite charming-looking. He just has this beguiling smile. But he's a black man, with blue eyes, and he has black very curly hair. And so how where did he come from? This is 10,000 years ago, and he was the first Briton. He was part of the first people who were in the area now known as Britain, right?

YD: Yes, so he was part of a broader pan-European population of hunter gatherers. And we knew already that these people had dark skin and blue eyes. And what we found out is that Cheddar Man or the Brits at that time were actually part of this larger European population. So they really were Europeans, and had the look of Europeans of the time. So they populated Europe and Britain as we now know after the last ice age. And so what is likely is that these people and modern easterners have some kind of common ancestors that after the ice retreated, repopulated Western Europe.

CO: Now, we should point out he's called Cheddar Man because he comes from a place called Cheddar Gorge. And thats no because he's a cheese eater. What was previously thought about Cheddar Man? What were the previous assumptions about him that this now completely changes?

YD: Yeah, so there has been prior work because it's such an iconic specimen, and I think people initially didn't know at all what kind of a human who was he there. There was talk that he may not have even been a modern human. But without the actual DNA work, there was no real way to get to this level of detail. So the best guess that people previously had is he lives in Britain, so he may look like people in Britain today. And it's only really with the invent of this DNA technology and the incredible advances that have been made in ancient DNA research in the last five-ten years, that it's now possible to look at these genomes that old. He has been depicted as a, I mean I'm ashamed to say, but the previous reconstruction was a rather ugly, white head. And yeah, we know now that is not true. And this, I guess, is where this comes from. People just didn't have the technology to know better, and it was the best guess at the time.

CO: Now, you must be really messing with those people who are calling for a return to a racially pure, white Britain. What kinds of responses have you had in the UK since you revealed that the first Britons were actually black?

YD: Yeah, I think this is one of the aspects that interests people most. The implications for identity as British people, and I mean what we suggest is simply that being British and whiteness is not necessarily something that comes together that. We have the example, and the proof I may even say, that this wasn't always the case.

CO: So how did how did North European actually become a land of fair-skinned people? What changed in pigmentation?

YD: So the current view, and this is very much a there's a lot of research still being done about this, is that the genetic variants that caused skin to lighten up were introduced to Western Europe at least by the farmers that came after these hunter gatherers. So people like the idea that a white skin is selected for because it provides an advantage in these northern regions where there is less sunlight. And therefore, a need for U.V. to synthesize vitamin D, so this is one of the hypotheses that it then became advantageous to be paler.

CO: So its evolution. The theory is that they may have evolved to the lighter skin pigmentation.

YD: I guess we know that we have evolved because we were looking at people's data, and there’s a lot of white people around here. So it's just not entirely clear why? But yes, the current view is it was the people that came after Cheddar Man that brought white skin to Western Europe.

CO: Well, Mr. Diekmann, it is fascinating. And I sure you're going to get a lot of people talking about this. Thanks for telling us about Cheddar Man.

YD: Yeah, thank you very much.

CO: Bye bye.

YD: Bye bye.

JD: Yoan Diekmann was part of the team that analyzed Cheddar Man’s DNA. We reached Mr. Diekmann in London.

Stuffed tiger

JD: Any tigers around you right now? Of course not, right? That's great. It's just that, well, you know you wouldn't hear a tiger, don't you? Before it leaped on you? I mean, they can leap 9 metres. And then they just clamp their jaws on your throat and you're done. Just because you assumed there wasn't an escaped tiger in the neighbourhood, or behind your entertainment unit. And so you probably think Bruce Grubb overreacted. Mr. Grubb is a 24-year-old farmer in Aberdeenshire, Scotland, who recently called the police to protect his pregnant cows from his worst nightmare come to life: a tiger. Of course, he knew it was unlikely that there was a tiger in his cow shed. But he also knew it wasn't impossible, because you can never be 100 per cent sure. Plus he was staring right at one — sitting still, and patiently waiting to leap. Without alerting the great beast to his presence, Mr. Grubb took a photo and sent it to police. They responded immediately, sending six cars and an armed response team. Meanwhile, they contacted local wildlife parks to see whether any tigers had escaped. None had. But of course, you never know with tigers. The minutes ticked away. Everyone remained alert, but totally still, including the tiger. Then, after 45 minutes, Mr. Grubb became suspicious about the big cat's failure to leap... or move. And when he bravely drove up to it in his truck, he discovered the truth: it was just a fairly large stuffed tiger toy. So, okay, sure: false alarm. But tigers play the long game. I mean, someone put that fake tiger there. And who's to say it wasn't...a tiger?

Back To Top »

Part three: Fake app, Nigerian painting

Halifax skating rink

JD: You know what they say: skaters gonna skate. But if they want to do it at the outdoor Halifax Oval rink, they're going to have to follow a few rules. The main rule: no turning around. The Halifax Oval is a counter-clockwise-only type of place. And if you try any of your fancy clockwise skating around this rink, you will get the whistle. That didn't sit quite right — or should I say left? — with CBC journalist Nina Corfu, who decided to figure out if that's really the best way to skate. She shared her findings with CBC Halifax's "Information Morning".

SOUNDCLIP

NINA CORFU: If you want to be a well-rounded skater you really need to be able to skate in both directions. And frankly we're raising a generation of children in downtown Halifax who only know how to skate one day. By that I mean they can turn corners, but only in one direction. So when they do crosscuts or crossovers, they only do it in a counter-clockwise direction and that's a problem. I’ll let figure skating coach Cheryle Gaston make the case for skating both ways.

CHERYLE GASTON: Obviously, if you want to do more than just skate for fun. If you want to play hockey, or you want to become a champion figure skater, it's important that you are able to skate in both directions. You can't have a weak side. You have to be able to turn in both directions. You have to be able to accelerate with speed out of the corner, so crosscuts in both directions it's just a non-issue. If you can't skate both ways, you're not going to make it very far in your hockey career. You're not going to be able to get very far in your figure skating career either. It would be kind of the same as if you're in a swimming pool and you only swam with one arm; you'd have to learn to swim with your other arm too. You can just do it one way.

NC: And she pointed out that while counter-clockwise is the most comfortable direction for most skaters, it doesn't suit everybody. Cheryle says, and this is really interesting, that everybody has a natural rotation to their body; a certain direction that they like to turn. So most figure skaters do jumps and spins in a counter-clockwise direction, but there's a small group that prefer to rotate in the other direction. So when you take a packet kids to the Oval for a public skate, and you only let them skate counter-clockwise, she says you're actually leaving some kids out.

JD: CBC journalist Nina Corfu, on the Halifax program “Information Morning”.

Fake app

Guest: Eric Goldman

JD: Face-swapping technology isn't a new thing. If you've used an app like Snapchat, for instance, you know it's fun to swap your face with your friend, or your dog, or your friend's dog. But some Reddit users have taken the technology to new lows. They're using software to create face-swapped fake celebrity porn. That is not fun at all. And here's something even less fun: celebrities aren't the only ones at risk through the use of "FakeApp". Eric Goldman is the co-director of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara University. We reached him in Santa Clara, California.

CO: Professor Goldman, just first of all what is Fake App, and how does it work?

ERIC GOLDMAN: It's a program that allows users to modify video to add someone else's face to a existing video. So by modifying the video, it looks like the realistic video, but it's been modified in a crucial way.

CO: And crucial because this is for pornography usually. That's how it's being used. And it's putting the faces of other people on the porn actors, is that right?

EG: Yeah, correct. So there are multiple ways that app could be used, but the current hot issue is that it's being used to take existing pornography, add someone else's faces to the actors of actresses, and therefore, make it look like they're participating in the pornography video.

CO: That must be frightening for people who are being used that way.

EG: I think it's actually frightening for all of us, honestly. Because none of us are safe from being a victim of that kind of fakery, so it's something I'm guessing most people can empathize with instantly. It's not about celebrities, and it's not about the targets of a harassment campaign; any of us could be a victim.

CO: How easy is it to do this? Tell us how sophisticated or unsophisticated that technology is at this point?

EG: The technology is pretty good. The results are quite lifelike and realistic. And the reason why that's significant is because the app is in the hands of amateurs. This is not technology that's in the hands of the movie studios, spending a billion dollars to make movies in a year. This could be you or me using the app to create our own fake video.

CO: Is the industry is the pornography-producing industry using this?

EG: There has been a long genre of fake pornography videos, but most the time, they were so obviously fake that they were kind of a category that didn't get taken seriously; it was almost like a joke. But now, it might be that the fake videos could be intermixed with the real videos, and the ordinary viewer, and even a sophisticated viewer, may not be able to distinguish them.

CO: Is there anything that the people who are producing these pornography videos are they breaking the law?

EG: The answer is almost certainly yes, but packing how they're breaking the law and who would have the right to shut them down is a pretty complicated story. And in the end, the real question isn't whether they're breaking the law, but could somebody do anything about it? And it's possible that irrespective of the slew of laws that might apply here, it may be difficult to actually enforce any of them effectively.

CO: But surely this is something that could end up being used as revenge porn as well, is it not?

EG: Absolutely. The app can be used to create a fake pornography video of a person who is being targeted for revenge, or harassment or some, other antisocial purpose. The app would be perfectly suitable for that purpose.

CO: And that would be illegal. Could that someone be charged for revenge porn because of that?

EG: Yes, if we could figure out who created the video, and it was somebody who was physically proximate to the victim, and was identifiable through their activities, there would be a number of ways in which the laws could make that person pay for their misdeeds.

EG: But there's a whole range of other circumstances where that won't be the case. And it will be much more complicated to figure out who did the video. Or to figure out who actually had the rights to enforce against the creation of video.

CO: What is the legal recourse someone could take if this happened to them?

EG: One obvious example would be something like defamation. That they would be portrayed as being in a pornography video that they were never part of, and that would be a false assertion of fact that might be injurious to their reputation. That's the kind of stuff that defamation would ordinarily cover.

CO: What are some of the other applications? Because, obviously, if you can make fake videos for pornography you can do all kinds of things, you could even put people into news stories that they didn't belong to and then post fake news. So what other things should people be concerned with?

EG: The fake pornography videos get the most attention because they're so horrifying and so contrary to our social expectations. But the possibility of creating fake videos in a wide range of circumstances is really unlimited. So, for example, it's possible to insert someone into a historical moment, kind of like Forrest Gump if you remember that movie. That kind of fakery could be used to make someone look like they were at the scene of a crime, or make them look like they were participating in some illegal venture that they actually were not a part of at all. And ultimately, in the end, it puts a lot of pressure on our ability to be confident in any video that we see knowing that the faces can be grafted in that video. We don't really know if we can believe any video that's ever published because of the possibility it's been manipulated.

CO: So in the end, I guess this muddies the waters, doesn't it? I mean you could deny that you were actually in the video for real. Say that people say well, I didn't tweet that; I was hacked. Or that video I was never there, that was obviously a recreation. I mean it sort of it makes everything bit muddy, doesn't it?

EG: We are so used to treating photos and videos as conclusive evidence of what they depict. That when we see the photo, that answers our question. I see X and Y taking place that photo, that must be the truth. Or in the case of a video, you show me a sequence of events that must have been the way things happened. And with the ability to create fake video that doesn't tell us the truth, we have to rewire our brains. We have to start from scratch with the idea now, how do we even know that this is true? What can we trust anymore? And it's going to be a big social adjustment for us to realize that we either have to rewire brains to disbelieve everything, or we're going to have to develop some better mechanism authenticating that the photos and videos are not manipulated in the first instance. And until we achieve that, I think we have the potential to actually get things wrong. Where we think something is true when it never was.

CO: OK, and we'll leave it there. Professor Goldman, thank you.

EG: Yeah, my pleasure. Thanks for the opportunity to chat with you.

JD: Eric Goldman is a law professor at Santa Clara University. And we reached him in Santa Clara, California. And since that interview was recorded, there have been some changes rather. Today, the Sub-Reddit, or the forum where Fake App originated, has been suspended. A Reddit administrator put out a statement saying in part, quote, “We want to make Reddit a more welcoming environment for all users. Communities focused on this content and users who post such content will be banned from the site. We will continue to review and update our policies as necessary.” For more on this story, do check out our website.

BC winemaker

The premier of British Columbia, John Horgan, said he is standing firm today. Despite Alberta Premier Rachel Notley's move to halt imports of British Colombian wine, Premier Horgan is not backing down from the decision to delay expansion of bitumen shipments to the west coast until further study is done. Mark Simpson is a winemaker with BC Wine Studio. That has a group that helped start other wineries in British Columbia. As you might imagine, he is not very pleased about the Alberta boycott. Mr. Simpson spoke to Stephen Quinn on “The Early Edition” this morning. Here's part of that conversation.

SOUNDCLIP

MARK SIMPSON: Well, I'm certainly very disappointed. You know we’re really just collateral damage in a much bigger dispute or you know trade issue. And BC wineries have nothing to do with the oil business; where we're just trying to make beautiful products for our customers all across Canada. In fact, we ship all across Canada. And a lot of BC wineries see Alberta as a really important market, so we really hope that this action can be reversed, and cooler heads can prevail. And we can just get on with business.

STEPHEN QUINN: It may have nothing to do with the oil business or pipelines, but is it do you think symbolic on the part of Rachel Notley? I mean BC wines are readily identifiable by their labels.

MS: Yeah, I mean this is a much bigger issue than I can really understand or comment on, so I'll pass on that question. But I think the most important issue for me — and many of my colleagues in the wine business, and consumers — is that we need free trade within Canada, right? The context is that we're in negotiations with the US and China and Mexico for free trade you know with our goods to their markets. And for us to not have a free trade within Canada certainly weakens our position in those discussions and we lose credibility on the world stage. So I think as Canadians, we all want to be able to enjoy whatever product it is that we make. Whether it’s Quebec cheese, or BC wine, or Alberta beef; it's one country one people. We all breathe the same air.

SQ: Your company is called BC Wine Studio, but you actually have clients who live in Alberta. What are you hearing from them?

MS: Well, they’re certainly disappointed as well. I mean this could potentially have a significant impact on our sales because we do sell wine in Alberta and other provinces, so we'd certainly not like to see this escalate.

SQ: We heard from a few Albertans on an open line on CBC Radio yesterday afternoon, who said that they'll just buy their wine from somewhere else, there's lots of wines from all over the world they have access to. And they don't need BC wine.

SQ: And I appreciate their right to make that choice. But for me, personally as a consumer, I think I'm going to go out tonight and have an Alberta beef steak and a bottle of Big Rock beer because I'm going to take the high road. And just hope that you know as Canadians, we can pull together and be one economy. And we can all support each other. And not let these disputes you know escalate like this. It's really disappointing for me personally as a consumer, and as a business person.

JD: Mark Simpson is a winemaker with B.C. Wine Studio in the Okanagan Valley. He was on CBC Vancouver's "Early Edition" this morning, speaking with host Stephen Quinn. Tomorrow morning, on CBC Radio One, on "The Current", Alberta Premier Rachel Notley will speak with Anna Maria Tremonti about the escalating trade war between Alberta and BC — and why she's not backing down.

Dateline: School frozen doors

JD: Dateline: Cambridge Bay, Nunavut.

[Music: Dateline Theme]

JD: The weather in Cambridge Bay this morning was a tad nippy: high was a brisk minus-28 degrees; that is minus-57 with the wind chill. And students of Kullik Ilihakvik elementary school got a reprieve, when they learned there would be no school today, due to the temperatures. But the school did not stay closed because of snow squalls, or the dangerously low temperatures. No, it stayed closed because it literally could not be opened. When officials arrived this morning, the doors were frozen shut. The vacation was cut short, though, when staff were eventually able to open the doors, and afternoon classes took place as usual. The temperature on its own would not have been a great hardship for the students and staff at Kullik Ilihakvik, because they're used to the cold. School only cancels outdoor recess if the temperature drops below minus-50.

Nigerian painting

Guest: Giles Peppaitt

JD: It's considered one of the masterpieces of modern Nigerian art. But for many years, Ben Enwonwu's 1974 painting "Tutu" was lost to the art world. But now, "Tutu" has turned up at a flat in London, England. And later this month, it will go up for auction. Giles Peppiatt re-discovered the painting. He's the Director of Modern African Art at Bonhams Auction House. We reached him in Cape Town, South Africa.

CO: Mr. Peppiatt, what did you first think when you got a call from this family claiming to have this Ben Enwonwu painting?

GILES PEPPAITT: No, I had no doubt that it was an oil painting by Ben Enwonwu that they had a painting signed Ben Enwonwu, or a picture by Ben Enwonwu. Anyway, I turned up at this relatively modest North London flat. And yes, it was a light bulb moment. I walked in to this sitting room, and there was this painting. And it wasn't anything I was expecting at all. Because to see this work A, I mean it wasn't all about the money as they say. It was just the fact that this is a lost work. And that was the first striking thing. I will say I had to be a little bit coy. I didn't feel I could say immediately my gosh, and sort of fall down on my knees and say this is Ben Enwonwu's “Tutu” because I was pretty sure it was, but I think it would have been a rash to have done that at that time.

CO: Tell us about this painting is called “Tutu” to tell us what it looks like, and who it represents?

GP: Well, it's a very interesting picture. It is a princess called Adetutu Ademiluyi. And she was the granddaughter of a king. And the artist, Enwonwu, was in Ife the ‘70s, and happened to meet this young lady. And she she's a lady of absolutely striking beauty. She's depicted in a three-quarter length, well half-length portrait. But in a sort of three-quarter pose, so she’s slightly quartering out of the canvas. But also, she's looking straight at you, so she does engage the viewer. It's also lit in a very unusual way — lit from beneath — up-lit beneath her chin, which puts a wonderful focus on her face, and gives us an almost sculptural quality. It's enchanting work.

CO: This is from 1974. How did it come to be missing for all these decades?

GP: What happened was that it was painted. We know it was exhibited at an exhibition — it was hung up on exhibition at the Italian embassy in 1975. And thereafter, it disappears. It was purchased by the current owners father, who’s sadly no longer, and they inherited it. And I will say they knew very little of its history. It is clearly signed Ben Enwonwu's. They knew it was them by him, or suspected it was by him. They didn't know much about him other than he was an artist of some repute in Nigeria. They certainly had absolutely no idea of its value. The wonderful thing is that it is here, and it was found in this north London flat. I mean it's like the sort of things you hear on the “Antiques Roadshow” that suddenly people have these wonderful things that are worth enormous sums of money. I mean it's a picture that also I will say has almost as some mythical status in in Africa — in Nigeria. You know some people almost call it “Africans Mona Lisa” because it has been lost for so long. Well, certainly over 40 years. And yet, people will be searching for it for certainly 30 or 40 years saying where is it; where is “Tutu”? And these things can be lost in inverted commas. And they will hang on someone's wall. And it might be this picture, or it could be another one. And it's only when people actually for whatever reason reason decided to have someone look at it, or get it valued, or maybe it gets damaged and its taken to restore it that they emerge blinking into the light.

CO: At the risk of being crass, what is its value?

GP: In dollars, its worth around three to five hundred thousand dollars. So that's two-three hundred thousand pounds. I say it’s worth, but we won’t know worth until after the 28th February, because that's the day on which it actually goes under the hammer in London. But the estimates that we've put on the picture is to two to three hundred thousand pounds. It is his masterpiece, and we confidently believe it will fetch in a new world record for his work. But where that record lies one just cannot tell. I mean the market for Nigerian modern art is very strong at the moment. There are an awful lot of collectors in Nigeria, and I will say around the world, who collect these paintings. And they are very fortunately very well-off and have deep pockets.

CO: But just finally, this painting is of tremendous interest in value to Nigeria, isn't it?

CO: I mean he was a very significant artist. What does it mean to Nigeria? I mean since the provenance is so murky are their claims on it? Is there a desire to get this repatriated?

GP: No, no, there's no claims on it. And we have checked with the Ben Enwonwu estate. And it appears that it was sold, and there was no real record of to whom. But it was definitely sold out of the estate. So it's acquisition was entirely illegal, and there's no time on it of any kind. No, I mean it is a masterpiece for Nigeria. Now, whether it will be purchased back by the Nigerian State, I just don't know.

CO: Well, I hope people get to see it one way or the other. And Mr. Peppiatt, I appreciate speaking with. you thank you.

GP: Carol, thank you very much.

JD: Giles Peppiatt is the Director of Modern African Art at Bonhams Auction House. We reached him in Johannesburg, South Africa. If you'd like to see the "Tutu" painting, go to our website.

Sound of the Day: Storm Trooper Hamlet

[Sound: A space opera?]

JD: That was not your average recital of Hamlet's infamous "To be or not to be" soliloquy. Instead of a mopey, indecisive Danish guy in uncomfortable tights, it was a scary-looking guy in a bunch of white plastic-looking armour: a stormtrooper from "Star Wars". In a short film by Quebec filmmaker Maxime-Claude L’Ecuyer, an elite soldier of the Galactic Empire interprets the Shakespearean monolgue from a galaxy far, far away. The film is called "Squad Leader TD-73028 Soliliquy" — and it will be shown today at a French film festival, as part of Telefilm Canada's Not Short on Talent initiative. There he stands, the stormtrooper, on the desert sands of Tatooine — portrayed, in this case by a sand-pit in the West Island community of Saint-Lazare. And the rest, except for his heavy breathing, is silence.

[Sound: Heavy breathing]

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

February 7, 2018 episode transcript

More Stories Like This