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 July 18, 2018

Hosts: Laura Lynch and Karen Gordon

Prologue

LAURA LYNCH: Hello, I'm Laura Lynch, sitting in for Carol Off.

KAREN GORDON: Good evening, I'm Karen Gordon, sitting in for Jeff Douglas. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

KG: Tonight…

LL: Teaming up. Prime Minister Trudeau has added some fresh new political muscle to the federal cabinet. And that has the Conservatives warning it's the provinces he wants to fight.

KG: Heat warning. The Federal Environment Minister comes out of her first meeting with Ontario's new government and tells us she's disappointed and accuses them of having no plan to fight climate change.

LL: Hiding in plane sight. A Chicago woman is known as a serial stowaway because she sneaks onto airplanes. Now a journalist who knows her warns that without help she is likely to reoffend.

KG: Bones of detention. In Texas archaeologists recover the remains of dozens of African-American prisoners who had been forced into labour on plantations after slavery was abolished, doing work that left their skeleton scarred to this day.

LL: Use yes. A disability activist warns that while it's all well and good for governments and coffee chains to cut down plastic garbage, banning plastic straws might harm some people's lives.

KG: And…Winter schnitzel. A wild boar expert offers some advice to the residents of a Whitehorse subdivision that's being terrorized by six bacon-sided escapees from a nearby farm. As It Happens: The Wednesday Edition. Radio that's rooting for the roam team.

Back To Top »

Part 1: Trudeau Cabinet Shuffle, Environment Minister, Texas Remains Found, Wild Boars

Trudeau Cabinet Shuffle

KG: Justin Trudeau made some adjustments to his front line today. The Prime Minister shuffled his cabinet but at the press conference afterwards he sounded more like a team manager countering his opponent's strength and adding fresh muscle for the long drive to next year's election. When Mr. Trudeau spoke to reporters he was asked whether the rise of conservative provincial governments will challenge his agenda and whether Doug Fords take over as premier in Ontario had anything to do with Bill Blair's new job as Minister of Border Security. Here's some of what the prime minister had to say.

SOUNDCLIP

PRIME MINISTER JUSTIN TRUDEAU: I think one of the things that we've seen in terms of what conservatives have been saying is that they are playing, not just here in Canada but around the world, a very dangerous game around the politics of fear, the politics of division, of pitting Canadians against each other and raising the kinds of anxieties that, quite frankly, don't help solve problems but actually hinder them. I'm reminded of the very first conversation I had with Bill Blair years ago when I was asking him to think about running for the Liberal Party of Canada. One of the things he said stuck with me and certainly echoes in my mind today as we give him these new responsibilities. He said the number one enemy of public security is fear. And when conservatives across the country are playing the fear card we need strong reassuring voices to counter that and to demonstrate that the safety and security of Canadians and their communities is something that we will never flinch on, that we will continue to deliver, and we will deliver in a way that pulls Canadians together instead of dividing them like the conservatives tend to be doing.

KG: That was Prime Minister Justin Trudeau following today's cabinet shuffle in Ottawa. Lisa Raitt had a slightly different take. Here's the Conservative deputy leader responding to a question about Mr. Trudeau's decision to hand over his own role as Intergovernmental Affairs Minister to the party's former House leader Dominic LeBlanc.

SOUNDCLIP

LISA RAITT: I think that is one of the more interesting appointments Mr. Trudeau has made for a couple of reasons. Number one, he demoted himself. He was the intergovernmental minister and he's determined that he wasn't doing a good job or a good job enough so Mr. LeBlanc’s going to do it. Second part is flashback to one of the first things that Minister LeBlanc did, which was to send letters to 32 appointees at Crown corporations demanding their resignations. That's not a light touch, that's not sunny ways, it was very heavy handed. So I think it's sending a message. But the third thing I would say is Minister LeBlanc is well liked and in some cases some people would consider him a ‘Tory whisperer’ because he's very charming and he does tend to get along. But beneath that charming exterior is a very strong political, savvy individual and I think what he's saying is that this government is ready to take on the provinces and have a fight, which is another broken promise because they said that those divisive politics were done, with respect to fighting with provinces. And here we are setting up acrimony both with respect to Mr. Blair and the province of Ontario, and Mr. LeBlanc and his ability to be tough — and more so than tough — to be extremely partisan.

KG: Conservative is you Deputy Leader Lisa Raitt responding to today's cabinet shuffle.

Environment Minister

Guest: Catherine McKenna

KG: Catherine McKenna didn't get a new job today but the environment minister’s old job didn't get any easier. This morning Minister McKenna had her first face to face with her new Ontario counterpart. It came after the Ontario pieces picked the cancellation of cap-and-trade as their first act in office. That puts Ontario on a collision course with Minister McKenna. Carbon pricing is a central plank in the Liberal government's commitment to fight climate change. It also means that the majority of provinces are now either fighting Minister McKenna’s policy or are simply failing to fulfill the requirements she's laid out. Environment Minister Catherine McKenna joined us earlier today in our Toronto studio.

LL: Minister McKenna, welcome.

MINISTER CATHERINE MCKENNA: It's great to be here.

LL: Minister, without provincial help how is your carbon pricing plan going to work?

CM: Oh, look we have a climate change plan and we've been really clear that we need to tackle climate change. We have an opportunity to save people money by being more energy efficient and also grow the economy and create jobs. And we've been able to do that. We're tackling our emissions, at the same time we've our government has worked with Canadians and created more than 500,000 jobs. That's the sweet spot, that's what Canadians expect.

LL: Your carbon pricing plan though is an important part of that. I'm sure you will admit that and yet you are not getting cooperation that you need from the provinces. So how is it going to work?

CM: Well, certainly, I mean, today I had a meeting with my provincial counterpart and it was really disappointing to see that they don't have a climate plan. And if you don't have a climate plan you don't have a plan for your economy because we know that there's a trillion dollar economic opportunity. I've been working with businesses across the board pension funds big, and small businesses, governments, municipalities — people understand that there's a huge opportunity. In Ontario alone, and this is numbers from the Ontario government, over 3,000 companies that have clean solutions probably much more because everyone's looking at how they can reduce their emissions and save money, but there's also 65,000 jobs in that area. And when I look — I've got three kids I want to do what's right and people want to do what's right for our kids. But we also want our kids to have good jobs.

LL: OK, you say disappointing, I'm assuming it might have been even worse than that for you. The Ontario minister Rod Phillips is saying there's no way Ontario is going to participate. He's saying he'll go to court to fight any attempt to impose pricing on Ontarians. What options does that leave you?

CM: Well, look we've been clear we've got a climate plan, and what's really disappointing is that climate change shouldn't be a partisan issue. We should all be serious about how do we be smart, how do we tackle climate change, how do we create good jobs, how do we grow the economy. I explained the economic opportunity. There's clear economic opportunity. The previous Liberal government, under that government, had the fastest growing economy while they were also reducing emissions. That's what people want. That's what Canadians expect.

LL: What do you do. I mean, you're not getting cooperation, you suggested back in April that you might go ahead and impose the tax anyway and then give the revenues back to the people who are living in the provinces rather than to the provincial governments. Is that still on the table?

CM: Well, I mean, I want to understand what the Ontario government is doing in terms of climate change. They didn't have an answer. And so that's, I'm sure, you know, that's what everyone wants to hear. We're certainly going to wait. Whatever we do, the goal is to make sure that we support Canadians ,that we support Ontarians. There are a lot of cities and towns that are working hard to reduce their emissions, businesses who want to save money. And everything from Beau’s Beer outside Ottawa, they have figured out a way to reduce their emissions and create great beer, so we're going to continue working with them. But we've been clear what our plan is.

LL: You said you’re going to wait though, how long?

CM: Well, we've asked all provinces to tell us by September what their plan is. And so we're going to, you know, wait and see.

LL: Okay and then what happens? I'm asking you again, you've floated this idea of perhaps directly taxing and giving revenue back to the people in the provinces. Is that still an option?

CM: I mean, I think, look polluting isn’t free and we want polluters to pay, but we want to make sure that we're supporting consumers. So yes, giving money directly back into the hands of Ontarians is an option. I think that that is something that makes sense and it allows people to invest in energy efficiency, to spend money which grows the economy and that's great. And look, I'm here to work with Canadians to find solutions to one of the biggest challenges we face, which is climate change. Unfortunately, it seems that conservative governments are not committed to climate action, and as I said, if you don't understand that you need to act on climate change we're seeing the costs right now. We're seeing the costs of extreme weather in deaths. We're seeing it in impacts on critical infrastructure, on people's houses. And there's this huge economic opportunity that even Ontario businesses are participating in.

LL: Can you make the case though, for going out and collecting a tax from Ontarians and then giving it back to them? It seems almost like a wasted exercise.

CM: Well, we want, you know, the idea behind our plan, what are we trying to do. We are trying to reduce our emissions and we want to create good jobs and foster innovation for clean solutions, solutions that we can use here, solutions we can export creating good jobs. And so by creating incentive for people to save money by being more efficient.

LL: But where's the incentive if you collect and give it back?

CM: Because you're saying to people you will save more money if you emit less.

LL: You mean they won’t be taxed as much, that would be the structure but they won't be taxed as much if they follow certain…

CM: Everyone returning the money will keep them whole. But it also means for companies who are polluting, polluting isn't free. So we want them to have an incentive to reduce their emissions. And if you look at the evidence, California is a great example. They have a cap-and-trade system, they've grown their economy and they've reduced emissions, and that's exactly what we want. We want people to have good jobs, jobs now, jobs into the future. As I said, we've managed to do this. We've created, with Canadians, over 500,000 jobs. That's 60 per cent more jobs than under the Harper government over the same period while we're being serious about tackling climate change. Look, this is the most significant challenge we face. I've got three kids, we owe it to them to have a more sustainable future. We also owe it to them to make sure that we position ourselves to have a strong economy and good jobs. And that's why the environment and the economy go together. In the 21st century that's where we're going to have the good jobs. We need to be more efficient. As I say, if we didn't get out of the stone-age because we ran out of stones, we got smarter.

LL: Minister, thank you for your time.

CM: Thanks, it's great.

KG: Catherine McKenna is Canada's environment minister. She was in our Toronto studio.

[Music: Laidback Guitar]

Texas Remains Found

Guest: Reign Clark

KG: A construction site near Houston Texas became an archaeological dig earlier this year when a backhoe operator saw something strange sticking out of the dirt — it was a human bone. Since then the remains of at least 95 people have been discovered. This week, officials announced that they believe the site is a cemetery of African-American prisoners forced to work on a plantation there around the turn of the 20th century — after slavery officially ended. The dig continues at the site in Sugarland, Texas. That's where we reached the lead archeologist Reign Clark.

LL: Mr. Clark, what are you learning about who these people were who were buried at this site?

REIGN CLARK: Well, this site was Ellis Camp Number One. It was a convict labour camp. A charter was given to Mr. Littleberry Ellis in 1878. He brought convicts in from the state of Texas, the prison system, to cultivate sugarcane here on site.

LL: So what would life have been like for them working in this area in these conditions?

RC: Well, a good part of the year temperatures are extremely high. The ground, although it's fertile, is very difficult to break, it's a very dense clay. The work for just planting would have been difficult, then harvesting cane would have been a very difficult very labour intensive process.

LL: The temperature would've been warm, would it have been comparable to the conditions that you're facing when you're out there today? Can you tell us what it's like there today?

RC: Well, today I have a crew excavating, it's 104 degree heat index right now. We work under canopies to offer some shade. We take numerous breaks, typically a couple of water breaks every hour. And when it gets too hot we retire to an air conditioned space. These folks that were here working on the sugar concern they didn't have that opportunity. This place was known as the ‘Hellhole on the Brazos.’ And folks worked here or they were worked from ‘can see, til can't,’ that's an old thing that came from this area, which means that you work from the time that you can see in the morning when the sun's up until you can't see anymore when the sun goes down.

LL: Now was the convict lease system that was in use here, was essentially used to replace slavery post emancipation?

RC: Well, I can tell you after the Civil War and after emancipation, the South, which was a very agriculturally-based economy was left without a large labour force. A system that relied on slavery previously and, you know, a reduced number of folks coming back from battle. There was a really depleted population of young males at the time and the convict labour system was utilized as a way to increase the available labour to produce agricultural products. It was also used in quarrying and mining.

LL: In all these cases though, that this really was slavery by another name. These men weren't paid for what they did?

RC: Yes, that does appear to be what the system turned out to be, yes.

LL: Do you know what they were in prison for? Were they major crimes, minor crimes?

RC: Well, the age ranges that we're seeing of those interred here are as young as 14 and as old between 50 and 70 years of age. You know, the youngest members here you kind of you kind of wonder what sorts of crimes could they be guilty of to be sentenced to 20 years of hard labour at a labour camps like this where life expectancy would have been much less than that. A common infraction would have been vagrancy that would have gotten you incarcerated to a place like this.

LL: And then out into the fields where you would die?

RC: Where you would work until you either became hardened to it or succumb to some malady — either exhaustion, overheating, overwork, some illness, malaria, yellow fever, smallpox. You know, it could have been dysentery, poor water quality, lack of food. There's a lot of things that could — when you don't have control of your own resourcefulness and your own domain it can be a difficult thing to stay alive, I’d say.

LL: You were just saying you can determine from the remains what the age ranges were. From looking at the remains can you also tell how they were treated while they were alive?

RC: In some cases yes, the overwork is apparent in some of the interments. There are muscle attachments that definitely show on the bone. We think that many were extremely heavily muscled and were used to work from a young age. In some cases you actually see scars on the bone where muscle was torn away from overwork — literally just heavy lifting or such repetitive motion that the muscles were literally torn away, the muscle attachments were torn away due to overwork.

LL: When you see all that when you're standing amongst all there remains, what is it like for you to be there?

RC: Well, it's extremely humbling. I do feel like I'm given the opportunity to tell about a part of Texas history that is very little known and shed light on the conditions here that these individuals faced and this population here came succumbed to. I am very thankful that I can take part in this project. I do believe that it's going to change Texas history for certain.

LL: Why?

RC: Because this is a completely untold story. This isn't something that you see in history books. It's not a glamourous part of our past in Texas here.

LL: You said that no one talked about it but there is a local historian and a former prison guard, Reginald Moore, who has long suspected that these bodies were buried somewhere in the area. Why do you think it took the construction of a school to find the remains?

RC: Well, because this place was lost to history for 90 years. His repeated discussions with the Texas Historical Commission and local development entities definitely swayed the Texas Historical Commission into recommending further work.

LL: Do you hope now that these people will be given a proper burial or a memorial of some sort?

RC: I'm certain they will. After our analysis is complete to better understand how these folks lived and died, they will be reinterred respectfully in another location, hopefully nearby.

LL: Mr. Clark, we'll leave it there. Thank you.

RC: OK, well thank you.

KG: Reign Clark is an archaeologist. We reached him in Sugarland, Texas. For pictures of the dig site you can go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient Tones]

Boris Johnson Resignation

KG: It's not too late to save Brexit. That's what Boris Johnson said today as he gave his resignation speech in the British House of Commons. Johnson resigned from his position as the country's foreign secretary more than a week ago over a prime minister Theresa May's Brexit plan, which he's criticized for keeping the U.K. too close to the EU. Here's some of what Boris Johnson said today.

SOUNDCLIP

BORIS JOHNSON: We should not and need not be stampeded by anyone, but let us again aim explicitly for that glorious vision of Lancaster House. A strong, independent, self-governing Britain that is genuinely open to the world, not the miserable permanent limbo of checkers, not the Democratic disaster of ongoing harmonization with no way out and no say for the U.K. We need to take one decision now before all others, and that is to believe in this country and what it can do. Because I can tell you it is because the U.K.’s admirers — and there are millions, if not billions across the world — are fully expecting us to do what we set out to take back control, and to be able to set new standards for technologies in which we excel, to behave not as rules-takers, but as great independent actors on the world stage, and to do free trade deals, proper free trade deals, for the benefit and the prosperity of the British people.

KG: That was the U.K.’s former foreign secretary Boris Johnson giving his resignation speech today in the House of Commons.

[Music: Ambient Bass]

Wild Boars

Guest: Ryan Brook

KG: Seven escaped swine doesn't sound like a big deal, but it is a serious problem right now in the Yukon. Last month, seven wild boars escaped from a farm near Whitehorse. The farmer and Yukon's Department of Environment have tried to catch them, but so far the farmer has only killed one. Ryan Brook has a wild boar expert and an associate professor with the University of Saskatchewan's College of Agriculture and Bio Resources. We reached him in Saskatoon.

LL: Mr. Brook, when you heard that these animals had escaped what was your first reaction?

RYAN BROOK: Well, my first thought immediately was that these animals have to be captured right away and, you know, whatever you're doing, drop what you're doing and get up get out there and get those animals either back inside a fence or kill them. There's such a serious problem it needs some very quick and immediate action, for sure.

LL: Well, why is it so important to catch them quickly?

RB: Well, these are a highly invasive species that can spread across the landscape very rapidly. While these were raised in a fence, they can become wild in the first generation. They have extremely high reproductive rates, so we're seeing six young per litter, up to three litters per year. So very high reproductive capacity, they can move very rapidly, they will eat virtually anything, they become sexually mature at about five to six months. So if one — hopefully not — but if by chance one of these females was pregnant you could have a mature male on the landscape in less than seven months.

LL: Right, because right now they're all females, correct?

RB: Yes, that's what I've heard. I would certainly ask that question very carefully again and just make absolutely sure that was the case, but that by no means eliminates the risk because that these wild boar will easily and readily mate with domestic pigs. So if they can find a domestic pig farm they'll go through walls and over fences and under fences in order to find a male. So just because they're all female doesn’t mean there's no risk.

LL: The farmer who owns them has apparently shot and killed one, is that is that good news or not?

RB: Well, I think it's probably bad news, that's probably the worst case scenario in terms of control because we've seen this many dozens of times here on the Canadian prairies. And that situation tends to be the case where either the owner or local hunters called and try and shoot them, which appears at first glance to think well this might be the right strategy. But the problem is it can really spook those that survive and we've seen animals go in, just a matter of months, from you know fairly docile, domestic wild boar to free ranging wild animals that are hitting heavy cover, dispersing, you know, 20-30 kilometres and then they become established somewhere else. So yeah, taking it one at a time is really not an effective strategy.

LL: How much damage have wild boar caused in Canada at this point?

RB: It's expanding for sure, and obviously, as the population has been very low, you know, 20 years ago when this started there was not a lot, but as the population has increased exponentially, you know, on the prairies here we're seeing an expansion of 25,000 square kilometres per year of new range that they’re spreading, and so I think we're seeing the edge of that right now in terms of hay bales, standing crops, harassing livestock, damage to native ecosystems, waterfowl, eggs being eaten, young being eaten — and that's only going to get worse over time.

LL: What about in Europe, I remember seeing wild boar on the sides of roads in Italy and in Spain and people seem to just sort of live with them hanging around. What kind of a global threat are they?

RB: They are indeed a global threat and they’ve become a real problem even — so they're native to Europe and Asia and to North Africa — and they've expanded dramatically and causing a lot of problems. I know France kills somewhere in the order of 600,000 to a million wild boar every year and the populations continue to expand. And so, yes, some may be more complacent about it but overall I think we can say it's a major global threat. I mean, these animals are the most successful large animal invasive species on Earth. They've been incredibly successfully, you know, they're not native to Australia and Australia has been overrun and they're doing everything they can to try and control them without a ton of success. In the U.S. it's a billion dollars a year in crop damage alone.

LL: If they're such a nuisance why would farmers keep wild boar in the first place?

RB: Well they can be useful. You know, there's a lot of options for raising meat and making money in there, and in some cases you can get quite a nice premium for raising wild boar. I understand in the Yukon there’s a very nice premium on the on the price of that. So there is an opportunity to make some money and up till now I understand there hasn't been any escapes or releases so, you know, I think everybody felt that it had been working pretty well. But the problem is in this case, and it seems almost inevitable at some point, where they get out side of the fence. And then the big question is what to do about it.

LL: Are you confident then, that they will be caught?

RB: I think it depends on what's done. So far they've been really leaving it to the farmer as I understand to take on the task of getting them back inside the fence. You know, it's been over a month now, I understand. So I think there's a real risk that these animals to take off and go on a big run hit some extremely heavy willow cover along the river or something like that and just fade away and disappear.

LL: Mr. Brook, thank you.

RB: Good to talk to you.

LL: Bye.

RB: Bye.

KG: Ryan Brook is a wild boar expert and an associate professor with the University of Saskatchewan's College of Agriculture and Bio Resources. We reached him in Saskatoon.

[Music: Ambient Tones]

Back To Top »

Part 2: Serial Stowaway, Starbucks Straws

Serial Stowaway

Guest: Joe Eskenazi

KG: In this day and age the stunt is unthinkable. But Marilyn Hartman is a pro. The 66-year-old Chicago woman has repeatedly snuck past airport security and ticketing agents in order to board flights — without a ticket or a passport. She's attempted it so many times that she's earned the nickname ‘Serial Stowaway.’ But her latest bid landed her in jail. Today, a judge released on bond and deemed her fit to stand trial. Joe Eskenazi has written about Ms. Hartman before and follows her case closely. He's managing editor at Mission Local in San Francisco. That's where we reached him.

LL: Joe, when is the last time Marilyn Hartman boarded a flight?

JOE ESKENAZI: Well, technically it would be her flight back from London to Chicago after illegally flying from Chicago to London in January.

LL: At what point did authorities realize what she had done boarding that flight to London?

JE: If I'm not mistaken, I believe that they realized what was going on when she tried to go through customs and could not. Not having a passport or a ticket or much of an alibi.

LL: And what happened then?

JE: She was detained and put back on a flight to Chicago and charged criminally.

LL: It is hard to imagine — I do a lot of flying — with the amount of security and scrutiny at airports that sneaking onto a plane is even possible in this day and age. But somehow Marilyn Hartman manages to do it over and over. How does she do it?

JE: Persistence and societal bias. Marilyn Hartman doesn't mind getting caught 19 times out of 20. And she'll often be let go to do it again and again and again because people see an old, grandmotherly, white woman and they immediately assume that she's discombobulated or confused or just, you know, out of sorts. If a young person of colour was doing these things I'm sure the police would be called, if not the FBI. So that is just how society works here. She's caught again and again and again, but, you know, there's never a serious charge. And, you know, even when people realize what's going on, nobody wants to throw the book at somebody who's obviously not well and is an aging, grandmotherly, white woman.

LL: Give us some concrete examples of how she literally evades security and ticketing agents?

JE: Well, it's very low tech. These are the same ways that people sneak in to nightclubs and things like that. You duck under the rope, you kind of join a larger group and walk in after them. Police reports have shown that she will take people's boarding passes out of garbage cans and things like that. If there is a courtesy call where they say ‘Gene Smith, come to the white area,’ she will come to the white area and people say ‘Are you Gene Smith?’ and she’ll say ‘Yes.’

LL: But don't they ask for a passport or something to prove who she is?

JE: Eventually you get caught and then you come off as a confused person. If you manage to sneak through enough and you manage to catch them with the back turned or catch someone helping someone else and kind of just walk right through, you will make it onto the plane. At that point you might even fly to your destination, but you still get caught because they do a headcount on the plane or you get caught going through customs. It's kind of a bittersweet thing because our kind impulses are taken advantage of by someone who is, though not well, has malign intent. And when you read the police reports — and there are hundreds of pages of them, not just in Chicago, which is where she's from but here in San Francisco and across the bay in Oakland and then in San Jose and up north in Seattle and in Los Angeles — the police are often exceedingly kind and behave just as you would want police to behave. There was an incident where she was caught walking along an airport road in Oakland at something like 3:00 in the morning and the policeman was exceedingly kind. He asked her ‘What are you going to do?’ ‘I'm going to fly to Hawaii,’ ‘How much money you have?’ ‘Three dollars.’ And it's like ‘Well, you think that's enough? ‘No it's not enough.’ And then out of the kindness of his heart, he drove her to the train station, but it's too late for a train, so he drove her to where the overnight bus could take it back to San Francisco. In other circumstances people like this get arrested, if not worse, in America.

LL: How many times has she actually managed to board a plane and land in her destination?

JE: There are two confirmed. She flew from San Jose to Los Angeles and then was caught by de-boarding, and then the most recent incident this year — Chicago O'Hare to London.

LL: And do you have any idea of the number of attempts she's made?

JE: Dozens, scores — and if you count the number of times that she's rebuffed earlier in the airports, around a dozen airports or so across the United States, if not more.

JE: Why do you think Marilyn Hartman does this?

LL: There's not a logical reason. People are very dissatisfied when there's not a logical reason that people can point to and say ‘See there you go.’ There's no superhero origin story where someone struck by a bolt of lightning while watching an airplane or anything like that. Marilyn Hartman is a homeless woman who has had a difficult life and, you know, has admitted mental illness problems and a compulsion that manifests itself to try and sneak onto these airplanes. If you take away the airplane part it is unfortunately a ubiquitous and sad and horrifying feature of American life, that you have aging homeless people in our cities and we don't adequately care for them. And what's more, well-meaning laws that keep people being locked up against their will are working against us in this case. So in this case it is someone who is obviously not well, but because she doesn't present a threat to herself and others, she's often released from jail and then goes right back to it.

LL: I know you've interviewed her in the past. What was your impression of her?

JE: I have a number of impressions. Marilyn Hartman first called me on a collect call from jail when I was in the library in Richmond, California and she's lucid to a point. She told me that she didn't like being locked up in red neck country, and that people there believe in the afterlife and so they don't care much about what's going on during this one. Then when it gets to questions as to why are you doing this, you go off the deep end very quickly into delusional claims that there's a vast overarching conspiracy and that there are hundreds of people at fault for her being the pawn of this Illuminati that's making her get on these planes. It's as delusional as you would expect. It's a stereotypically delusional as somebody dressing up as Napoleon — and coming abruptly after a lucid discussion, it's very disturbing.

LL: She appeared in court today. A judge deemed her fit to stand trial and released her on bond. What do you make of that decision?

JE: Phil Rogers from NBC Chicago has done spectacular work covering this case. I need to single him out as someone who has been sensitive and thorough in a case where oftentimes the novelty of it causes people to play it for laughs when it's really not funny. And Phil Rogers had a very thorough article today in which he points out that it seems they are taking precautions. You know, she has been in supervised care, she's on medication. The doctor in charge had said that she is stabilized and she is not going to be left turn devices. I believe that she's going to some manner of supervised care. That would strike me as being the least line of necessary behaviour like anything less than that is a sure fire failure. To be realistic, I don't think anyone anticipates that this is the last we'll hear of her with the airports. But if she is going to stop doing this, it's going to require managed care.

LL: So how worried are you then that she will try to do this again?

JE: I mean, it strikes me as exceedingly likely because even the smallest misstep could lead to that. And it could be weeks, it could be months or maybe it doesn't happen but the track record is pretty clear.

LL: You talked earlier about people making a joke out of all of this and she's got the catchy nickname ‘Serial Stowaway.’ To many it does seem like a funny story and an impressive feat. What do you make of the attention the story gets?

JE: I think it is not a good thing. I think that people are not being empathetic when they only see it as a source of mirth. And I think that blame has to go back to the various local news media that make this into kind of a funny, goofy story. It is definitely a story, but I think that it's necessary also to look at it from the point of view of someone who is not well. And again, if you take out the novelty of someone crashing airplanes, you instead just have a mentally ill, aging, homeless woman with little to no resources. And that's not funny, that's ubiquitous, that's our national shame.

LL: Joe, thank you for your time.

JE: Thank you. Thank you for seeking me out.

LL: Bye.

JE: Bye.

KG: Joe Eskenazi is the managing editor at Mission Local in San Francisco. That is where we reached him.

[Music: Piano Ballad]

B.C. Bear Attack

KG: Jordan Carbery has some fears about returning to his home in Bella Coola, British Columbia — and rightly so. You may have heard his story. Early one morning a couple of weeks ago, a grizzly bear charged at him on his property. The CBC in Vancouver caught up with Mr. Carbery yesterday when he learned he could leave the hospital and return home. He recalled the day of the attack, which included some gruesome details.

SOUNDCLIP

JC: I got, you know, nine tenths of the way back to the house. And then all of a sudden she hit me from behind me and sent me twelve feet in the air or whatever. And instantly she's on me, grabs me by the skull, my scalp rips, she drops me. She grabs me by the abdomen tossing me around a bit and I remember her being right at my abdomen biting me and it was like surreal, I was looking down on it. I just started hitting her on the back of the head and then she knocked me over again and I found myself in that martial arts training that we had just done for Ranger training, and one of the scenarios we have is a big drunk guy pushes you over at a camp site and he’s coming at you. How do you defend from the ground? And so muscle memory kicked in and she came at me for the third or fourth time I just started kicking her in the eyeball like with my heel. I kicked her three or four times and that like stunned her, she was confused by what was going on. She wasn't expecting it, I guess. And that gave me time to stand back up. Then she came at me again and they started doing hammer strikes trying to hit her on the snout. She turned her head the other way and when she did that we had about maybe four feet between us and I was only four feet from my door so I just quickly put two steps into my house and thankfully she didn't follow me in because that could have been awful, too. I felt like I was I was going to die or whatever, like, I felt like this was it, I was fighting for my life, I knew that. Time slowed down and I was definitely panicked, I was holding my gut in because she got me across the abdomen so I was holding my arm across that, I didn't want to look because it felt like that was the worst thing. I ran downstairs, ran out the door to the car, which is on his steps out the door, fumbled around a little bit because, of course, you know, and blood’s in my eyes and I can’t see that well or whatever. And as I'm grabbing the door handle I look to my right and she's charging me again. So I just barely get back in the car and drove myself to the hospital and I'm bleeding pretty bad and repeating to myself ‘Don't pass out, don't pass out,’ because I really felt like I was going to pass out.

KG: That was B.C. park ranger Jordan Carbery speaking with the CBC in Vancouver about a bear attack on his property earlier this month.

[Music: Trance Bass]

Starbucks Straws

Guest: Lawrence Carter-Long

KG: Today, the giant hotel chain Marriott International announced they were going to remove all plastic straws from their properties by this time next year. The ban extends to plastic stirrers, too. Companies like Starbucks and McDonald's have said they'll do the same. And in the state of California a pending ban and sit down restaurants would mean plastic straws would only be offered on request. The bans are being hailed as good for the environment, but advocacy groups say the straws are an essential part of some people's lives. Lawrence Carter-Long is the communications director for the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund. He's in Berkeley, California.

LL: Mr. Carter-Long, what have these corporations missed when it comes to people with disabilities and plastic straws?

LCL: I think what they miss are the specifics. Paper turns to mush, glass breaks, metal can get dangerously hot and damage teeth, bamboo isn't flexible and neither is silicone, and both silicone and wheat can be dangerous for people who have allergies. So when it comes to disability and access needs, one size doesn't fit all. And so simply saying something like use a reusable straw isn't going to work for everyone.

LL: Why is the plastic strong the right one for people with disabilities?

LCL: Plastic straws in many, many ways are the most flexible. They're really, I think, across the board, the most useful for the most people. You know, the conduction of heat isn't an issue, cold isn't an issue. They don't break down in the same way that paper straws do. It’s interesting, Joseph Friedman, his original concept of the bendable straw, these flexible straws where the top half bends, first develop those in 1937 watching his daughter at a soda fountain. It didn't get any traction until he started marketing that flex straw to hospitals a decade later in 1947, because hospitals were the obvious fit for patients and for people who had limited mobility.

LL: Is it one that you personally need for yourself?

LCL: No, I don't need it and I don't think you need to — we shouldn't wait until we have a personal need for a flexible straw until we consider the needs of all stakeholders. You know, that's really the issue. I'm the communications director for a national disability rights organization here in the U.S., and we also do international work. The issue came to our attention when people started calling and writing us saying ‘What's being done about the flexible straw issue and the straw bans that are happening across the world?’ And we decided on behalf of our constituents that it was important to take action.

LL: Is there a policy from a city council or a large corporation that you feel does take your considerations into account?

LCL: Not by the letter. I think the opportunity exists. Seattle first instituted, or tried a ban on straws, on plastic saws about 10 years ago. They found that it was unworkable and put it on hold and then all of a sudden brought it back up for consideration and implemented it without the consultation of the disability community. And they even have their own body, a group there to inform the city council and they didn't go to them and they didn't ask. New York City had a law that when the disability community came to them and said ‘Wait a minute what about us?’ They're now rewriting that law. I think places like Montreal and others in Canada have an opportunity to learn from the mistakes that have been made in the United States. The solutions are actually fairly simple, if you don't need a straw, don't use a straw. If you can use a reusable straw, use that. If you need a plastic straw, for whatever reason, that should be made available to people. You shouldn't get the evil eye. You shouldn't get the third degree. Restaurant owners should have a stock of them in the storeroom or under the counter for people who ask. The solutions really are that simple.

LL: Well, it seems though that Starbucks seems to be doing what you're saying, they're backing off an all-out ban saying Friday they'll continue to offer straws to those who need or request them. Are they doing what you want?

LCL: I think that's a step in the right direction. The problem is that nobody has seen the specifics yet. The devil is in the details, as the old saying goes. And so the way that these things are implemented are as important as what is implemented. And in order to find solutions that work you need to involve the disability community from the get go, rather than afterwards when people start complaining or protesting or causing a ruckus. That's, I think, really the issue. Some disabilities might be obvious, if someone is let's say quadriplegic, but others may not. This is also an issue for folks who are survivors of stroke, for people who have Parkinson's disease who may have difficulty controlling their bite, for people with cerebral palsy who might produce excessive saliva. So there's a multitude of conditions that these bans affect and since one size does not fit all we've got to take them all into account in order to be fair.

LL: So, if I'm hearing you correctly, then what you're suggesting is that it's not good enough to just say we'll have them available if you ask, you want them to be available for use for anyone.

LCL: Well, I think we ought to trust people when they say they need them. If they tell you that the other options, let’s say bamboo straws or silicon straws don't work for them. That probably comes from experience. It's probably because they've tried different things and they don't work. So if a person tells you that they need a plastic straw, take them at their word.

LL: Some people have been suggesting that this comes down to a choice between the environment — between protecting it and not protecting it. And I'm wondering how you respond to those who say these banning these straws are vital to the health of our oceans?

LCL: Well, I'd say that you can look at studies that say that it's about 0.3 per cent of the garbage that's accumulated in the oceans are straws, plastic straws. We're going to get much further, much faster, by doing things like tagging, tracking, abandoned fishing equipment or changing the ways in which we do waste disposal. That's not to say that we shouldn't put our time, effort and energy into the plastics that go into the ocean, including straws. But that we need to have a process in order to take into account those people who need them as those policies are being developed rather than after the fact. I'm convinced that the way science is going, one day we'll get there ,one day we'll have alternatives to plastic that the majority of people can use. But until, and unless, we get to that point, we shouldn't be leaving people out.

LL: Mr. Carter-Long, thank you.

LCL: Thank you very much.

KG: That was Lawrence Carter-Long from the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund. He was in Berkeley, California.

[Music: Jazz]

USFL/Trump

KG: And now quote unquote. The United States Football League had a short run. But in just three seasons — from 1983 1985 — there was a lot of drama and most of it off of the field. From the start the USFL positioned itself as an alternative to the National Football League. With a spring season the league filled a gap for fans keen to watch football during the NFL offseason. But some owners, those who dubbed their competitor the ‘No Fun League,’ were more ambitious — enter Donald Trump. In 1983 Mr. Trump bought the New Jersey Generals. The team in a dismal record, but the carefully combed mogul wanted in on the action. After Mr. Trump entered the arena, the league ballooned from 12 teams to eighteen, and Mr. Trump pushed to shift the league's schedule from the spring to the fall. That was seen as a signal of his intention to merge with the NFL. Charlie Steiner, the radio voice of the Generals, said in a 2016 Esquire article quote “You could cut and paste the USFL and the GOP and it's the same damn story. It's all about him and the brand and moving on to the next thing if it doesn't work,” unquote. The owner of the Tampa Bay Bandits, Canadian John Bassett, shared that view back in the 80s. He warned that the shift in schedule would ruin the league. Trump dismissed him insisting quote “If God wanted football in the spring, he wouldn't have created baseball,” unquote. To say that Mr. Bassett and Mr. Trump didn't see eye to eye is an understatement. Earlier today TV Ontario's Steve Paikin tweeted a letter Mr. Bassett sent to Mr. Trump in 1984 as the league was starting to unravel. Mr. Bassett wrote quote “I've listened with astonishment at your personal abuse of the commissioner and various of your partners if they did not happen to espouse one of your causes or agree with one of your arguments. You are bigger, younger and stronger than I, which means I'll have no regrets whatsoever punching you right in the mouth the next time an instant occurs where you personally scorn me or anyone else who does not happen to salute and dance to your tune,” unquote.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

July 18, 2018 episode transcript

More Stories Like This