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 March 28, 2018

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello I'm Carol.

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

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight…

CO: A sorry-less excuse. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Prime Minister have both asked the Pope to apologize for the Catholic Church's role in running residential schools. And now the Pope says he's sorry but he can't.

JD: Gold star. The late Peter Munk became a very rich man after founding the world's largest gold mining company. And then he turned his focus to sharing that wealth.

CO: An in-depth report. After 12 right whales die in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, the Federal Government announces new regulations. Our guest says the changes are better late than never.

JD: Wrapped beneath his finger. An Australian archaeologist tells us about discovering the remains of a mummy inside an Egyptian coffin that no one had opened for 150 years.

CO: Children should be seen but not herded. A new law in Utah will allow parents to allow their kids greater freedom. A state senator explains why he supports free-range parenting.

JD: And…Griller tactics. When it comes to getting the gunk off your barbecue, a would-be inventor decides that wood would be better than brushes with a dangerous wire bristles. And now he's cleaning up. As It Happens: The Wednesday edition. Radio that finds new ways to get in top scrapes.

Back To Top »

Part 1: Pope: No Residential School Apology, Peter Munk Obit, Wooden BBQ Brush

Pope: No Residential School Apology

Guest: Thomas Rosica

JD: For more than 100 years Canada carried out a cultural genocide against the Indigenous people of this country through the residential school system. That was the finding of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The majority of those schools were run by the Catholic Church, and in the commission's final report they recommended the Pope issue an apology. And last year in a private audience with Pope Francis, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau requested that apology. Now the pope has given his answer. In a letter released today from the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, Pope Francis is said to have carefully considered the request but quote “he felt that he could not personally respond,” unquote. Senator Murray Sinclair was the chair of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. He spoke to CBC News earlier today.

SOUNDCLIP

SENATOR MURRAY SINCLAIR: We heard repeatedly from survivors of abuse in Catholic residential schools that they needed to hear an apology from the church and they'd never heard one. The Anglican Church has apologized. United Church has issued an apology. Presbyterians have issued an apology. But we've heard nothing of that substance from the Catholics. In Pope Benedict's statement of sorrow that he issued when he was meeting with Chief Fontaine, back before the settlement agreement was being implemented, was simply nothing more than an acknowledgement that people were hurt while in the schools. And it’s like the driver of a car saying ‘I'm sorry that he got hurt when I ran you down. But I'm not responsible for the fact that the car ran you down.’ That's not good enough.

JD: That was Senator Murray Sinclair speaking to the CBC News earlier today. Father Thomas Rosica is the CEO of the Salt and Light Catholic television network. We reached him in Toronto.

CO: Father Rosica, why does Pope Francis feel he cannot personally respond to this request for an apology?

THOMAS ROSICA: This is a very complicated thing. The Pope is not going to be used simply to apologize for a matter that has been carefully studied, reflected upon and that is the responsibility of the local churches where these things happened. So, over the past years each of the dioceses, that is the local churches across Canada that have had the unfortunate experiences with the First Nations communities, have been actively engaged in a reconciliation process. There are some in the government and elsewhere who would think, get the Pope over here just to apologize. I'm sorry have a photo opportunity and move on. Unfortunately that's not the way it goes. This is a much more serious process of authentic and true reconciliation that has engaged the entire church in Canada — all of the dioceses, all the priests, all the bishops. We’re living in a time right now where apologies can become very cheap. They can become simply political instruments or tools to appease people. And the Catholic Church is deeply concerned that this doesn't happen with the First Nations.

CO: Well they're asking for it. OK, you can say that you feel it’s not enough, but that's what they're asking for. What is wrong with complying with that?

TR: Just because a group — I can ask for anything, any group can request anything.

CO: It’s not a group. This is the First Nations, this is the Indigenous people of Canada as a collective have asked you for this.

TR: Exactly. And the First Nations people, many of those who are wise and intelligent, realize that the Church is engaged in a full process of reconciliation. I’ve had First Nations people say to me ‘We don't want something cheap. We don't want just an apology and a photo opportunity. We want a deep personal commitment on the part of the individual pastors of the church.’ The other thing that people have to realize is the nature and structure of the church is not some big homogeneous national group. This is not the church in Canada. These are the individual dioceses in Canada. And I can assure you that every diocese, especially where First Nations schools, residential schools, every single diocese is deeply involved in the process. Furthermore, for a papal visit to take place the Pope doesn't just decide to hop on a plane and come on over. There's a long process.

CO: He is coming for a visit eventually, so why can't he make the apology when he comes in this night and the visit he will at some point be making here?

TR: Nothing prevents the Pope from doing that. There's nothing. At the time being the pope does not feel he can respond to item 58 as is stated there. I have no doubt whatsoever that Pope Francis or his successor will come to Canada and first on the agenda, the high priority of visits will be the First Nations people. The Pope is extremely close to Indigenous people, perhaps more than his predecessors. The statements the Pope's made in Bolivia, the statements he's made in the Amazon, his closeness and also the many visits he has with First Nations people in Rome, is rather extraordinary. And no government tells the Pope what to say.

CO: You mentioned that in 2015 he went to the Americas, he apologized for the sins of colonialism to Indigenous people in the Americas, in Bolivia. He apologized to the Irish victims of sexual abuse in 2010. He was able to issue these apologies. So is this not the same thing?

TR: No, it's not the same thing. This is, I would say the issue with the First Nations people it's a long historic issue that requires very careful reflection and a long process of reconciliation. And I do not think it is correct to simply say sex abuse, the clergy sex abuse of minors is the same thing as this issue with the First Nations people. Let's not mix the two things up. The Pope is the leader of the Roman Catholic Church. The Pope works closely with the local churches, that is the diocese, and that's what's going to happen. That's what's under way right now. The Pope is very, very aware of this issue. It's a high priority for him.

CO: Is the Vatican concerned that if it issues an apology it might face some financial liability?

TR: Absolutely not. Is that in the letter of Bishop Gendron yesterday?

CO: I'm asking you.

TR: Did you read that in the letter?

CO: I did not read that in the letter. The letters didn't say anything, didn't address why the Pope was not going issue this apology. I'm asking you if that's possibly the reason.

TR: I'm addressing the letter of Bishop Gendron and the reference to paragraph 58 of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. That's my responsibility. That's what you told me you were going to ask.

CO: I'm asking you if that's a possibility, if they're concerned that they issue an apology there will be a larger liability that the Vatican will have to accept?

TR: That is not the issue of why the Pope is not issuing this apology on Canadian soil at this moment.

CO: Are you are you in any way denying the responsibility the Catholic Church had to the 150,000 kids who went through those schools, most of whom were run by the religious orders of the Roman Catholic Church?

TR: There's no question that the Roman Catholic Church was responsible for a great part of the schools, the residential schools, as well as many other schools and the government was also involved in that.

CO: And the government has as apologized.

TR: But what does an apology mean? Does it mean the process is complete?

CO: It meant a lot to the Indigenous people of Canada.

TR: It could have meant a lot to them, and I'm sure that many of the efforts of the Catholic Church now underway processes of reconciliation mean much to the local communities. I've spoken to many of them and their leaders and they're deeply grateful for the honest commitment of the Roman Catholic Church in this whole matter.

CO: The First Nations National Chief Perry Bellegarde, is saying in a statement he's actually going to try and pursue with Pope Francis to urge him to make this commitment to commit to article 58. He's asking that should happen.

TR: The Pope is very aware of the seriousness of this, but I'm sorry that's not how it works. Anybody can request anyone to apologize, but it doesn't mean it's going to happen at that moment.

CO: And so what do you want to say to First Nation's National Chief Perry Bellegarde, the question of why can't the Pope comment apologize to First Nations for what happened in those schools? What do you say to him?

TR: The Pope has not said he will not come. This might not be the appropriate moment. It may not be Pope Francis. It could be his successor. The fact is that the Catholic Church is deeply aware of this whole issue. The Catholic Church is repentant for all of those things that have happened. But I would be very careful in using the word apology. You know, it's a cheap word for many people and the Catholic Church takes it very seriously.

CO: Father Rosica, thank you for your time.

TR: Thank you.

JD: Father Thomas Rosica is the CEO of the Salt and Light Catholic television network. We reached him in Toronto. And we did reach out to Bishop Lionel Gendron who wrote the letter saying the Pope would not apologize. We did not receive a response.

[Music: Ambient Bass Tones]

Peter Munk Obit

Guest: Anna Porter

JD: Peter Munk was a mining magnate, an extremely wealthy one, and with that vast wealth he was extremely generous. Across Toronto very prestigious institutions bear his name, from the Peter Munk Cardiac Centre at Toronto General Hospital to the Munk School of Global Affairs. Over the course of his life he donated nearly $300 million to causes and institutions. Peter Munk died today. He was 90 years old. In 2013 he spoke to the CBC about his decision to retire from Barrick Gold, a company that he had run for 30 years. Here's part of what he had to say.

SOUNDCLIP

PETER MUNK: I'm quite proud of Barrick. But the share prices today are down, tomorrow it goes up and it goes up again. I'm also quite proud of the cardiac centre, I’m proud of the contribution I could make to Toronto. It’s the least I could do because of what they’ve done for me. Is their any country on this earth that I could have done what I've done here? So the cardiac centre, the Munk School, the Munk debates, the other foundations. You know, I'm not a billionaire. I do my best. So if you add all that up, and I’ll leave five great kids who I think will be decent Canadian citizens or citizens of the world. I think that's not a bad beginning for an immigrant.

JD: Anna Porter is a writer. She was friends with Mr. Munk. We reached her in Toronto.

CO: Anna first of all, I'm sorry for the loss of your friend.

ANNA PORTER: I'm sorry too. He was a great guy, he was an extraordinary person and I was lucky to have known him.

CO: How did you come to meet Peter Munk?

AP: I originally talked to Peter when I was working at a publishing company called McClelland & Stewart, and we were publishing a book about Clairtone. Peter had been the co-founder.

CO: They made sound systems, right?

AP: Yes, they made hi-fi — very beautiful hi-fi pieces. And anyway the company didn't fare well to say the least. And the book told the whole story. And my boss Jack McClellan being impecunious didn't want to be sued by Peter. So I contacted Peter to make sure that he would not sue over the book and he actually, you know, he thought the book was fair. So we got talking and he was, you know, he was born in Hungary, I was born in Hungary. We shared a lot of interests. And then I got to know him a whole lot better, quite a few years later, when he told me the story of how he and his family survived the Holocaust.

CO: And this is quite a story, isn't it? This is how he left Hungary when the Nazis invaded in 1944. He was a teenager, wealthy family, and they fled on the famous Kasztner train.

AP: Yes. I had wanted to write a book about the Holocaust in Hungary, but I couldn't find a way into it. It's such a dismal, horrible, dreadful, upsetting story and Peter told me the story, his own story, and that really helped me form what became a book. His mother ended up in Auschwitz. She was not saved by the grandfather who bought seats on the famous Kasztner train.

CO: And he came to Canada as a teenager. This is something that meant a lot to him. He spoke often about his love of the country. What was it that he liked? What was so important to him about this country?

AP: He felt that the country had been enormously generous to him. It had given him opportunities that he would not have had elsewhere. He was delighted with the school and his schoolmates who treated him as an equal even though his English was rudimentary and he was Jewish, and he had no sense of being discriminated against. And coming from Hungary where he had personally experienced, as a young child, discrimination and in fact his younger brother — he had saved — his younger brother told me the story. He personally saved his brother from being beaten up.

CO: How did he come — you mentioned Clairtone and that was an early business — but how did he come to be Barrick Gold? How did he build this enormous mining interest and become the biggest gold miner in the world? Where did that come from?

AP: He was an entrepreneur, a businessman, and he had, you know, after the failure of Clairtone he and his partner went to England and they were looking for business opportunities. And they were very successful again in the hotel business and then in real estate and then he mining and oil and gas exploration. But he loved the challenge and he was always, always enthusiastic, and there was always going to be the next mine. I used to go to his annual meetings. He would come striding out with his hat, his trademark fedora, and no time at all he would have everybody clapping. It's quite a performance.

CO: At the same time you know that another school mate actually, Peter C. Newman, another writer, author, journalist was fascinated with Peter Munk. He wrote many glowing things about Mr. Munk but he also mentions that he was always taken by how Peter Munk could hobnob with people in dictatorships, that the places where he went to have his mines like Chile, that he had no difficulty with was Agosta Pinochet was doing, that he had that he was okay with that. Peter Newman always thought that was kind of at odd with his Canadian values. What did you make of that?

AP: I think he managed something that a lot of people can't do, which is to separate his business from his personal feelings.

CO: Did he ever speak about it? Did he say he had to hold his nose sometimes when he was dealing with the kinds of characters and the places he was going into to extract minerals?

AP: I think only once.

CO: And?

AP: I'm not sure I should tell you. But it was one of the mines, and where it was, and what he thought about the government in that place.

CO: Was it the place that he decided not to mine in because of his concerns?

AP: I think eventually yes, eventually the project may have been abandoned.

CO: He had — of course anyone in Toronto would know his name because it's on the side of a hospital. He had the Munk Centre he is part of. And of course there's a lecture series, there is global affairs institute that he started — all of these things. Why did that matter to him? Why was he so involved with philanthropy?

AP: I think it all had to do with his passion for Canada and his gratitude for what Canada had allowed him to do to be — and it was payback.

CO: Going back to Peter C. Newman who said that he often compared him to the Great Gatsby and that very kind of Fitzgerald character, and he also said that Peter Munk was a man with a dozen faces. Who was the Peter Munk that you knew?

AP: Passionate, engaged, involved, irrepressible an enthusiast, big smile, big heart and a real sort of caring for causes.

CO: Anna, I really appreciate you telling us about Peter Munk, thank you.

AP: Thank you.

CO: All right take care. Bye-bye.

AP: Bye. Anna Porter is a writer and it was a friend of Peter Munk’s. We reached her in Toronto. Peter Munk, the mining magnate and philanthropist, died today. He was 90 years old.

[Music: Ambient Synth Tones]

Wooden BBQ Brush

Guest: Jason Janes

JD: Maybe you’re the kind of barbecuer who believes everything you cook should be infused that the smoke of everything you cooked before. If not, you clean your grill. And because of warnings about the dangers of wire barbecue brushes you're cautious about what you use. Over the past years we have heard some pretty awful stories about the bristles from wire brushes getting dislodged and then ending up in people's food — and then ultimately in people. And you can imagine it is no fun getting a piece of wire stuck in your gullet. Well Jason Janes likes to barbecue. So when he heard about the problems with wire brushes he looked for a safer alternative to scrape his grill. When he couldn't find one, he made one — and now he's turned it into a full time job. We reached Mr. Janes near Corner Brook, Newfoundland.

CO: Jason, tell us your solution to the problem of unsafe barbecue brushes?

JASON JANES: I’ve made a barbecue scraper out of juniper.

CO: Juniper wood?

JJ: Juniper wood. It's technically tamarac but juniper is our product here what we call it, and I call it the Juniper Barbecue Scraper.

CO: And tamarac, this is a wood that people know elsewhere as tamarac. So what part of the tree are you using?

JJ: Well, we use the main part, the trunk of the tree, and we mill that to make the barbecue scrapers from the trunk of the tree. As you used the barbecue scraper on the grill, on the grates of the grill, grooves start to form into the wood and it has those grooves that clean the grates.

CO: And why juniper? Why couldn't you just use any wood?

JJ: So the profile of juniper is very, very unique. It is almost a hardwood but it is still a softwood. So if you know it, it turns yellow in the fall, needles fall off it. That property means that it's heat resistant, so it lasts longer when you're using it as a barbecue scraper compared to other softwoods. It's also easier to use than some of the hardwood so it fits right in the middle. But that unique property also means that it has a no taste profile. So you would use oak, pecan, cheery things like that to smoke on your grill and it would leave the flavour on your meat. You would, you know, plank a salmon on a cedar plank to give it that kind of a taste. Well sometimes you don't want that taste. So if you use those products it leaves a taste juniper doesn't. It's right there in the middle with nearly no taste profile so it just fits nice for a barbecue scraper.

CO: Is this something you always did or is it something you started to figure out when you heard about all the problems people were having with the brushes?

JJ: Ironically, I didn't even hear about the problems with the wire brushes until after I started this. But it all came about the same time. I was trying to find something to clean my barbecue grill with. I stopped using a wire brush, not because of the dangerous bristles, but because they kept getting rusty on me. And I was looking for something, and I went around to different stores trying to find a solution, couldn't find anything. Then all of a sudden I started hearing about the dangerous wire bristles and said there has to be a better solution here. Picked up the phone, called my dad and said “Hey you've got a piece of juniper?” and the rest is history.

CO: So that’s how you made the one you first started using. When did you get the idea that you thought maybe this would be something other people might buy from you?

JJ: I started it as, I’m going to say it was a little bit of a lark at the beginning. I posted it on Facebook just a picture of what I had created thinking that hey some people would say ‘oh that's cool.’ Some people would say ‘you're a fool,’ whatever the case may be. And I just did it to see if I could get a rise of some of my friends. Well as it turned out, a lot of them said to me ‘Jason can I buy one from you?’ And that's really where it kind of began.

CO: How many of these brushes have you sold?

JJ: In our first six months we sold just shy of 5,000. So that was ending in December. And we thought we were going to slow down them for the winter season but we haven't slowed down at all. We've now sold just as many as that again. So we're now close to or across the 10,000 unit mark. And we have bookings for you know similar numbers leading into the May long weekend.

CO: And you’ve got the whole family involved in this now?

JJ: The whole family. And I'm starting to bring an extended family now.

CO: Did you have to quit your job, is that what you did to make it work?

JJ: So yeah, so I'm an entrepreneur. I like to start things. I get really excited when they're this early stage of creation. And once they mature, they either succeed and we put in place a management team, or else they don't succeed and I go on to a new project. So doing this type of thing is sort of in my blood, it's what I like to do. I've always been involved in a startup.

CO: You've obviously thought about barbecuing and smoking quite a bit. What's your favourite thing to cook?

JJ: I'm a big fan of pulled pork and mac and cheese. So both of them are smoked on my Kamado smokers and my guests can either have the pulled pork as a sandwich with smoked mac and cheese on the side, or they can combine the two together and it's absolutely delicious.

CO: It's sounds great. I'm inspired. Jason, good luck with your project. Good to talk to you. Thanks.

JJ: Thank you very much for having the Juniper Barbecue Scraper on your show.

CO: OK. Bye-bye.

JJ: Bye.

JJD: We reached bristle-free barbecue brush inventor Jason Janes near Corner Brook.

[Music: Upright Bass]

Back To Top »

Part 2: Right Whale Deaths, Free-Range Parenting

Right Whale Deaths

Guest: Tonya Wimmer

JD: The Gulf of St. Lawrence was a hostile place for endangered right whales last summer. 12 of them died there and scientists learned that several of the whales were killed after being struck by ships or being entangled in fishing gear. So today, the Federal Government announced new changes in the hopes of preventing more right whale deaths. The changes include changes to the snow crab fishing industry, more speed limits for shipping channels and more resources for volunteer rescue teams who help to save the whales. Tonya Wimmer runs the Marine Animal Response Society in Bathurst, New Brunswick. We reached her today in Halifax.

CO: Ms. Wimmer, do you think these changes today that have been announced by the federal government, will they prevent more right whales from dying?

TONYA WIMMER: I think that's basically setting up the situation for sort of that best case scenario. I mean, there were a number of announcements made which were really trying to aim to reduce either the overlap with when the species might be there or to change practices to reduce the chance of them being entangled or struck by a boat. So for the first attempt of our government and our industry is to really do this on a large scale it's, you know, it looks good.

CO: But how desperate is the situation of right whales at this point?

TW: This is a species which the population, as we found last year, is declining. We then saw, you know, these 18 dead whales in less than a year period since last June. And then, of course, the announcement that they hadn't — there were no babies observed born in the usual calving grounds, so this species is sort of sitting on a fine line of whether it's going to make it or not.

CO: And 12 of those 18 right whales that were killed, the cause of death was called blunt trauma from ships or entanglement from fishing gear. Is that generally how most — that's how the 18 principally died?

TW: With the ones in Canadian waters we were able to do sort of the detailed necropsy on seven of them. We determined that the majority were either blunt trauma or entangled in fishing gear. And then in the U.S. they’ve been able to do that for a few as well. But the animals there were further gone.

CO: This isn't the first time the Canadian government has tried to deal with this, is it? Transport Canada, I understand, tried to have a temporary speed limit on the Gulf of St. Lawrence just last year. And more than 500 boats were found to be violating the speed limit. So why would anything change now?

TW: Well, I mean, I think that last summer it was a bit of a in a sense a chaotic time in terms of everything that was going on with the whales — the measures that were coming out, the sort of the speed with which the measures were coming out, the mandatory or permanent measures there during that timeframe. And so everyone had to adjust very quickly. But I think in the last five to six months what has happened there's been a lot of consultation with all the industries and the scientists and the NGOs and the government to really try to lay out a plan that will work and that everyone at least knows that, you know, the majority of the measures that are being put in place are sort of talked about and agreed upon by all.

CO: We're talking mostly about the shipping being one of the factors. The other big area is the fishing, the snow crab fishery, which we found that many of these whales were tangled in fishing gear. What's in the proposal would change that? How is that going to affect the snow crab fishery?

TW: Well, I mean, I think there's actually a number of measures that were announced today that very clearly are directed at the fishing industry. Some of them have actually been elements that the industry themselves put forward even last November at the minister's roundtable. But there are a number of other things in there of which, you know, I think could be a lot more discussion about. Things like having areas that are closed either right from the get go or once a number of animals are spotted. They discussed things like having reduced traps, which a lot of that's to make sure there's less rope in the water column, which is what whales get entangled in. They have new requirements for reporting and whatnot, so it just again to have to really figure out how is it actually going to work and how is it communicated and how will the industry be able to respond.

CO: But they're also going to delay the start and end early on the snow crab harvesting, so how is that going to affect the bottom line? Any pushback from the fisherman who harvest snow crab?

TW: No, and actually that was one of the measures that the industry also had brought to the table last year about if they, you know, they very much recognize that if there were the means for them to get out of the harbour they actually could start the season sooner. It really comes down to a matter of if the icebreakers are available and if it is basically safe for the fleets to do so. You know, I mean, they’re a quota based system, which means that they go until they capture as much snow crab as they're allowed in terms of the actual quota and then they're done.

CO: Crab traps are great big heavy things that are at the bottom, but it's the ropes that are attached to them that go to markers at the surface, or buoys at the surface. That's the problem, right, those ropes?

TW: Yeah, I mean, it is a very hard thing to sort of discern because when we deal with the dead or the entangled whales and are taking a year off and a lot of that gear is not individually identifiable to the fleets. It's been difficult to figure out where the whales are getting entangled in which fleets. And a lot of time it is just rope.

CO: Well what about this, some other jurisdictions are experimenting with rope-less methods rope-less traps. Why aren’t we moving in that direction?

TW: Rope-less fishing, the idea behind it is that there's just that surface rope either isn't there or it's held down below the water surface at the bottom until they need to pull back their gear, which is a wonderful solution. It's just that it hasn't really been tested very rigorously in active fishing fleets. Really the idea now that getting that technology into the hands of the fleets to basically test it out and see if it can withstand, you know, the weather, does it still fish and, you know, does it actually work from the point of view of keeping the rope out.

CO: The other area of the changes deals with rescuing the whales once they are trapped. And we know that there was this volunteer, Joe Howlett, who died trying to free your right whale from being entangled in fishing gear and there was a ban on those kinds of rescue operations. They lifted the ban but they're putting some money into the rescue operations. What do you make of that?

TW: You know, I guess the hope everyone has is, hopefully we won't even be needed because the prevention measures will see the reduction in, you know, entanglements and things like that. But until that day where that risk goes to zero obviously people have to be there to help when it's possible.

CO: You mentioned the numbers are right whales now down into the hundreds and that it’s very alarming news that there were no calves that were sighted in southern waters last year — all very alarming. Are all these changes too little too late?

TW: I think no one gives up hope ever. I think we've seen that with even other endangered species that you really do everything you possibly can. There are so many people who have been working on this issue from so many facets of life that that really is what gives the most hope for what we're doing can make a difference. The biggest concern is really because of that absolutely catastrophic high mortality that we observed last year. It’s very hard to see how the population can go up if you don't have babies born and you have so many being removed from the population.

CO: Ms. Wimmer, I appreciate speaking with you, thank you.

TW: Thank you so much.

JD: Tonya Wimmer is the director of the Marine Animal Response Society in Bathurst, New Brunswick. We reached her though, in Halifax.

[Music: Ambient Tones]

Fort McKay Métis Land Deal

JD: In the first deal of its kind the Fort McKay Metis Community in Alberta has bought all the land it's living on back from the province. The community bought the territory north of Fort McMurray for $1.6 billion. Plans to develop the land, beginning with transforming a clearing into a community pavilion. Felix Faichney is the youngest board director at the Fort McKay Metis Community Association. He spoke at a press conference today.

SOUNDCLIP

FELIX FAICHNEY: I’d just like to say how big of a day this is for people and our community. I'm from Fort McKay, I'm a grassroots member. I grew up on the Fort Mckay Metis side of the community and I still reside there today with my son. And I’ve got to say this is huge. I've seen the community grow since I was a kid and this is something that's never happened before, and it's something that we've worked so hard to achieve from leadership and as a community. Growing up as a youth and Fort McKay I didn't have the same opportunities as a lot of other kids and cities and stuff because we couldn't — we didn't have our own place, our own land so we can create those opportunities for ourselves. So this is something so huge for our people so we can create those opportunities, those housing opportunities for our youth, for the next generations coming up, for our people right now for my kids’ kids, for my aunties and uncles kids, kids. This is something so huge and something that means so much to me and it brings me great pride to say that we own our own land. It warms my heart to know that my son is going to have those opportunities I didn't have when I was growing up. Thank you.

JD: Felix Faichney is a board director at the Fort McKay Metis Community Association. He was speaking at a press conference earlier today.

[Music: Industrial]

Free-Range Parenting

Guest: Lincoln Fillmore

JD: For children in one U.S. state independence day will come in just a couple of months. This month the governor of Utah signed a free-range parenting bill. The law is said to be the first of its kind in the U.S. and it will go into effect in early May. Lincoln Fillmore is a Utah senator who sponsored the bill. Today he's in Las Vegas. And that's where we reached him.

CO: Senator Fillmore first of all, for those who don't know the term what does it mean to say free-range parenting?

LINCOLN FILLMORE: Free range parenting is the idea that kids need freedom to explore the world, to discover things on their own. And it helps them to learn the problem solving skills and self-reliance they're going to need to be successful as adults. And they can do that through independent play and independent exploration.

CO: What are some of the examples of free-range parenting?

LF: Like letting your kids go to the park. I remember when I was a young child my mother would give me money and say go to the store and buy me some butter, you know. So I’d walk, the store was about a half mile to a mile away. We crossed under a freeway underpass, a fairly busy road just, you know, walk safely to the store, pick up the butter come back and give it to mom. And that, you know, experiences like that really give kids skills they can't get it if parents are hovering over them constantly.

CO: So what is what is now illegal in Utah?

LF: Rather than being illegal I’d say the law prior to my bill passing was unclear. So the definition of neglect wasn't clear about what it included and what it didn't include. And so even though we haven't had a lot of problems in Utah, across the United States parents have been arrested or harassed or investigated or even had children taken away from their custody, for doing things as simple as letting their kids play at the park, or walk to and from school or walk to and from the store. Those kinds of things aren't really a danger to kids. Parents ought to have the right to be able to make a determination about what their kids are ready to do and ready to experience. And what kind of lessons they need to learn and how to learn them. But government agencies, using two broad definitions of law, have just overreacted and have created a circumstance where parents are getting — are facing arrest, facing the loss of their children, for crimes as simple as letting kids play at the park. And that's what I was trying to address by passing this bill.

CO: At the same time, I guess, it seems that has gone too far that the helicopter parents are out of control and the whole — we've done a number of the stories in the United States about parent parents being charged or arrested or losing their kids because they gave them a little bit of freedom. But it is — the world is full of dangers. I mean, the reason why these laws and restrictions came into place is because of things can go wrong. So what are the limits? Where is the line that you shouldn't cross before you are neglecting your kids?

LF: I want to push back a little bit. I mean, I think you're right that there is a perception that the world is unsafe or that there are, you know, constant and ever-present dangers on kids and that they run the risk of harm or injury or kidnapping. But the truth is that those kinds of crimes have never been lower in the recorded human history — at least here in the United States. Stranger kidnapping is almost unheard of now and much less prevalent than it was when you or I were growing up. So the overreaction that comes is the fact that people are responding to a perception of danger that just doesn't really actually exist. You know I'm a career educator. I have no problem with helicopter parents. As a teacher I found them somewhat annoying. But if parents want to be helicopter parent there's no problem, they can be if they want to. But parents need to have the freedom not to be. To be able to say that I want my kid to have the kind of childhood that helps prepare them for life.

CO: There are though, parents who are negligent and neglectful, so how do you still protect kids like that? How do you allow parents to let kids wonder and wander. And how do you protect them from bad parenting?

LF: This bill it just amended the definition of neglect to list some specific things about what it isn’t. That if your child is of sufficient age and maturity that you can let them play at the park. You can let them walk to and from school. You can let them ride their bikes around the neighbourhood. But it doesn't change the definition of neglect other than that. So we're not touching anything that is truly neglect. In fact, as we were preparing this bill we had some parents arrested for actual neglect, right. That they were keeping their children locked up in a bathroom downstairs for hours at a time. And, you know, not feeding them, not giving them sufficient water, not giving them bathroom breaks. That actually is neglect. And this law would not change anything about that, but simply give parents assurance that when they let their child, who is old enough and mature enough, explore the world on their own, that they're not going to be held criminally liable for neglecting their child.

CO: OK so a 10-year-old kid who can go to the park and play on his or her own, that may be acceptable. What if if the authorities see a 4-year-old in the park by her or himself playing. I mean is there an age that you will determine whether those parents are not taking proper care?

LF: It's a combination of age and maturity, which is the standard that we’ve used in Utah for many years that has served us really well.

CO: What would be the age? Where do you think, if your law is done properly, where do you think the cut-off would be?

LF: I think it would it would have to be a combination of age and maturity. Some 10-year-old kids would be fine playing at the park, but others who might be developmentally disabled or, you know, maybe have communication problems or disorders. It probably wouldn't be safe for them to be alone at a park. So the reason not to put an age in there is to make sure that we're protecting kids who just because they reached a magical birthday are automatically qualified — they're not. We want to make sure that we leave it up to parents to decide when their children are old enough and mature enough, but leave enough flexibility in there that our state Division of Family and Child Services or a judge who would be determining would be able to look at the whole picture and make a determination.

CO: So Utah is being called the first state to pass a law like this, a free-range parenting law. Do you think other states will do the same thing/

LF: Actually, I do. I've been surprised, but pleased by the media attention this has received. Your calling me from Canada is evidence of that. As I think this gets out and people read the legislation that we passed you'll see this really is a perfectly reasonable way to make sure that parents are protected when they make parenting decisions about how they can help their children best experience childhood.

CO: All right. I'm sure we'll have people who have things to say here in Canada about this and it’s good to talk to you Senator Fillmore. Thank you.

LF: Thank you, Carol.

JD: Lincoln Fillmore is a Republican senator in Utah. We reached him though, in Las Vegas. We've posted that interview to our website if you'd like to share it or listen again: www.cbc.ca/aih. And if you would like to share your opinion of free-range parenting hit us on Twitter or Facebook @CBCAsItHappens. Or email us aih@cbc.ca or give us a call: 416-205-5687

[Music: Random Tones]

Back To Top »

Part 3: Australia Mummy Re-discovered, Ancient Amazon Settlements, Non-Profit Grocery Store

Australia Mummy Re-discovered

Guest: Jamie Fraser

JD: A gem has been hiding away at the University of Sydney's Nicholson Museum — if a gem can be said to consist of extremely old bandages and hunks of bone. It is an ancient Egyptian coffin. And for the last 150 years it was thought to be empty, but it turns out the 2,500 year old coffin is very much not empty. Last year, archaeologists at the University found the remains of a mummy inside. And now they've made that discovery public. Jamie Fraser is the lead investigator. We reached him in Sydney.

CO: Mr. Fraser, how did you discover that this coffin, this Egyptian coffin wasn't empty after all?

JAMIE FRASER: We wanted to lift the coffin up to take some photographs of the hieroglyphics that we knew would be on the underside of the coffin but we never had recorded. But to lift the coffin up we had to make sure that it was empty and records said that there was mixed debris inside was the actual phrase, but we really didn't know what that meant. So we opened the coffin up expecting maybe a couple of bandages and a few bones and we were really quite astonished by what we saw.

CO: What did you find?

JF: Imagine that someone has picked up this coffin and shaken it about like a cocktail shaker. And you can kind of picture this jumble of bones, beads, bandages, chunks of resin that were poured on the mummy as a preserving agent — all mixed up together. And you have to understand that the mummy was taken out of the tomb by robbers in the 1850s. And so they've cut through the mummy looking for amulets and jewels and things that they could sell, leaving the remains all jumbled up behind. And then that coffin has been taken to a dealers place probably in Cairo and shipped all the way to Sydney until it eventually got to the Nicholson Museum at the University of Sydney. So it's a complete jumble of remains.

CO: And whose remains? Who do you understand is in this coffin?

JF: Carol, that's the million dollar question. We know that the coffin was made for a lady called Mer-Neith-it-es, and she was a servant in a temple of Temple of Sekhmet. Sekhmet was the lion-headed goddess. Whether that mean she was a priestess or a worshipper or just a wealthy lady who had connections to the temple, we don't know. But that doesn't necessarily mean we have the remains of Mer-Neith-it-es herself inside the coffin, because it was very common in the 1850s when this thing was purchased, the people like Sir Charles Nicholson, who actually purchased this coffin on behalf of the university went into dealers shops and said ,you know, here’s 100 pounds for a coffin and I'll give you 150 pounds if there’s a mummy inside. So the dealer would have out the back stacked up coffins and stacked up mummies and I would put any mummy in a coffin and sell them as an ensemble. So the big question driving is research for us is ‘Well are these the remains of Mer-Neith-it-es herself?’

CO: And anything pointing at this point, I know you have to do a lot of research on this, but any indication at this point that it might be Mer-Neith-it-es?

JF: Yeah, every day we're learning something new and every time we learn something it seems to confirm that picture. So we know that Mer-Neith-it-es was a woman, we know the Mer-Neith-it-es was an adult and we know that she was quite wealthy and we also know that she lived in Egypt about 600 BC because that’s the period of the coffin. One of the most astonishing things we found was over 7,000 beads and these beads very, very likely from beaded net been stitched together in a very elaborate design, and that beaded net would have been laid across the top of the mummy as it was placed into the coffin. And that's a really important bit of information because beaded nets are a very, very popular part of mummification around the 26^th Dynasty. So we're talking about 600 BC, and that's the first bit of information that tells us that the remains belong to the right time period of the coffin. It doesn't make it Mer-Neith-it-es herself or at least not yet, but we're starting to build the case.

CO: So it would be quite an extraordinary discovery, would it not? If it is the remains of Mer-Neith-it-es 2,500 years old and that it's her remains inside this coffin. How often does that happen in your line of work?

JF: Many coffins in Museums around the world have the correct mummy inside them and many do not. But what is unique about this particular find — and it just blows my mind — is the fact that the remains are so badly disturbed. And that is actually kind of an opportunity for us as researches because dealing with human remains are, of course, there's a lot of ethical considerations and we never, ever want to do anything that's disrespectful to that individual. In this particular case the tomb robbers have done such damage to the remains that there's nothing we can do that does any further damage. And in fact by excavating it remains we're really doing a conservation of what's there. But it's a remarkable opportunity for us because it's a really rare time that we can physically handle the bones of a mummy and look and feel for evidence of diet, disease, pathologies on the bones all those sorts of information.

CO: And what are the ethical considerations in your profession? Should these remains be interred and once you finished your research?

JF: Yeah, it's a really good question and we've been thinking very deeply about these sorts of issues. We were never sure from the outset whether we should excavate or not or just leave things as they should be. We decided to excavate because we couldn't conserve the remains properly. We made sure that we recorded everything that was there, this jumble of 19th century antiquarians and the looting that it been inspired by recording it to the best possible degree of technology at the moment. So researchers in 100-years’ time can still ask questions about this melange debris. Once we've — now that we finished the excavation we've bagged up and catalogued all the remains from the coffin. Once we finished our study we'll put them back in the coffin so that they're there for posterity.

CO: And what will you do with the coffin? We're actually building a new museum on the campus of Sydney University. And this is a really wonderful opportunity for us because we can develop Australia's first dedicated mummy room. I mean, for me the driving motivation behind this mummy room and showing these remains is a very commonly a sort of magic refrain that was painted on the walls of tombs that said something like, speak my name so that I may live again. And I think by doing this, by speaking Mer-Neith-it-es’ name and displaying her remains, or at least her coffin and her story with respect, we’re able to speak her name again and so make her live forever.

CO: Mr. Fraser, thank you for telling us the story.

JF: It's my pleasure.

JD: Jamie Fraser is the lead investigator and senior curator at the Nicholson Museum. We reached him in Sydney.

Ancient Amazon Settlements

Guest: Jonas Gregorio de Souza

JD: The Amazon rainforest may have once been much more densely populated than previously believed. Archeologists from the University of Exter have discovered the remnants of 81 villages interconnected by roads deep in the tropical forest of what is now Brazil — long before the arrival of European colonizers. Jonas Gregorio de Souza is an archeologist and research fellow at the University of Exeter in the U.K.

CO: Mr. de Souza, what first gave you the inkling that there might actually be settlements in this part of the Amazon?

JONAD GREGORIO DE SOUZA: Yes so we already knew that this that there were similar kinds of archaeological sites. So the area where we went, which is the headwaters of the Tapajós river was a blank space on the map. But it could provide the connection between the sites that we knew existed to the west and to the east. And that's partly what motivated us to go to that area. And also we knew from historical accounts that travelers describe this region of the Tapajós river as being full of very large villages connected by roads. So we were hoping to find also the archeological correlates of these villages that were founf in the historical time.

CO: So what you're describing is something quite elaborate. I mean, it’s these villages, the roads connecting — and how come they hadn't been found before?

JDS: There is very little research in many areas of the Amazon. The Amazon is huge. And another important thing is that many of these sites have been discovered only recently due to the advance of the agricultural and cattle ranching practices in the Amazon. So it's kind of ironic that thanks to modern deforestation we're actually able to find this site now.

CO: And what sorts of things have you found?

JDS: We found sites that are earthworks, so they are ditches that were excavated and they have different lay outs. Most of them are circular or almost circular. Some of them have earthen platforms or mounds that were probably platforms for houses, and in a few cases we also found sunken roads leading to the site.

CO: What makes you think that this might have been permanent settlements? Why isn't this evidence of — as you knew that there were nomadic people, there were people moving in and out. How do you know that these were not just temporary settlements?

JDS: Yeah, that's a very interesting thing. One of the sites that we dug had a very deep layer of a type of soil that is called Amazonian dark earth. And these are very dark and fertile soils that in the Amazon are usually associated with Pre-Columbian human settlements. And we know that this type of soil is formed due to long term human occupation. So it's a consequence of humans depositing organic matter and charcoal and burning and that sort of thing.

CO: How many people do you think lived in these settlements you've discovered?

JDS: We have done an estimate that is based on site size and it's very important to stress that this is only an estimate and it might as well be proved wrong in the future. We're estimating for the whole southern rim of the Amazon something between 500,000 and a million persons, which may not sound as much if you look at the whole size of the area, which is actually a huge area it's almost 2,000 kilometres from east to the west. But not long ago people had the idea that the whole Amazon basin would only shelter about one to two million people. So now we know definitely that this is not true, that the most recent estimate about 6 million people for the whole Amazon basin. And some people are even speaking about eight or 10 million.

CO: Are we talking about a homogeneous population? Did they all get along and trade with each other and live in harmony?

JDS: Well, for one thing these sites are fortified settlements. The structure that we found, the ditches around the settlement are defensive then it is very likely that there might have been a large degree of warfare in these regions.

CO: And within these fortified settlements how did people live, what kind of housing did they have?

JDS: Possibly similar to the kinds of houses that you see nowadays in Indigenous groups living in the Amazon. They are made of perishable material. They're just made of wood and straw and palm leaves and that sort of materials, which will not survive the archeological records.

CO: What happened to all these people who lived in these settlements?

JDS: It's very likely that even before the Europeans ever set foot on this area and diseases spread much faster. And the population was already weakened and was already experiencing losses. And then when the Portuguese finally arrived in the region, then you have direct violence and genocide and slavery to a population that probably was already dwindling as a consequence of diseases for which they had no antibodies.

CO: What else do you want to know? You've answered a lot of questions for yourselves. What are the, sort of, things you want to investigate in this region?

JDS: Now that we are we have done a preliminary survey and we have excavated the site and we have filled an important gap in the archeology of the Amazon, but we need to know a lot more about this very region. So we want to return there and excavate more sites and excavate some of the largest sites and we want to understand how they were built, if they were built all at once or if they were gradually enlarged over the centuries, if there were different cultures that lived in the area over time. So those are questions that we still need to answer about this area.

CO: Mr. de Souza, it is fascinating to hear about this story and I appreciate you telling it to us.

JDS: Thank you.

CO: Bye-bye.

JDS: Bye-bye.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

March 28, 2018 episode transcript

More Stories Like This