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 2019

The AIH Transcript for January 15, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

CAROL OFF: Hello, I’m Carol Off.

JEFF DOUGLAS: Good evening, I'm Jeff Douglas. This is “As It Happens”.

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

JD: Tonight:

CO: Strictly confidential. After Theresa May's Brexit plan suffers a death-blow in Parliament, an opposition MP says the secret to the British PM's survival is for her to call a second referendum.

JD: Case dismissed. The International Criminal Court stuns observers as it tells the Ivory Coast's former strongman that he's free to go on charges of crimes against humanity.

CO: Not for lack of trying. A Saudi national facing charges in Nova Scotia seems to have disappeared, despite having his passport confiscated out of concerns that he would flee.

JD: Save the date. A Montreal woman flies to the United Kingdom to meet the man whose decision to donate a bit of his bone marrow saved her from a rare autoimmune disease.

CO: Angling for victory. A town in Wales predicts declining fortunes for their New Zealand competition, as the two go measure for measure in the competition to find the world's steepest street.

JD: And.... sparing their felines. Thousands of people in Silicon Valley are out in the cold because they can't afford homes. But that hasn't stopped one family from putting up 2 pet cats in a $2000-a-month apartment.

JD: "As It Happens", the Tuesday edition. Radio that's wondering how they came up with the scratch.

[Music: Theme]

Part one: Brexit vote, Saudi national flees, Welsh steep hill

Brexit vote

Guest: Tom Brake

SOUNDCLIP

JOHN BERCOW: The “aye’s” to the right: 202. The “no’s” to the left: 432.

JD: Today, MP's in the U.K. House of Commons delivered a resounding defeat to Prime Minister Theresa May's Brexit deal. It's left people across the country wondering: what now? After her loss, the PM put on a brave face — and offered to put her own political future up for a vote.

SOUNDCLIP

THERESA MAY: It is clear that the House does not support this deal. But tonight's vote tells us nothing about what it does support. Nothing about how — or even if — it intends to honour the decision the British people took in a referendum parliament decided to hold. First, we need to confirm whether this government still enjoys the confidence of the House. I believe that it does. But given the scale and importance of tonight's vote, it's right that others have the chance to test that question if they wish to do so. I can therefore confirm that if the Official Opposition tabled a confidence motion this evening, the government will make time to debate that motion tomorrow.

JD: Theresa May speaking to Parliament after the defeat of her plan to leave the European Union. Then, Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn stood up to respond to the Prime Minister.

SOUNDCLIP

JEREMY CORBYN: The results of tonight's vote is the greatest defeat for a government since the 1920s in this House. This is a catastrophic defeat for this government. After two years of failed negotiations, The House of Commons has delivered its verdict on her Brexit deal. And that verdict is absolutely decisive. The most important issue facing us is that the government has lost the confidence of this House and this country. I therefore, Mr. Speaker, inform you I have now tabled a motion of no confidence in this government. And I'm pleased that motion will be debated tomorrow. So this House can give its verdict on the sheer incompetence of this government. And pass that motion of no confidence in the government.

JD: That was British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn speaking in the UK Parliament today. Tom Brake is a Liberal Democrat MP who voted against Theresa May's plan. And who's in favour of a second referendum. We reached Mr. Brake in London.

CO: Mr. Brake, do you think Theresa May can survive tomorrow's non confidence vote?

TOM BRAKE: Yes, I think that the Prime Minister will survive the motion of no confidence tomorrow. Because the one thing that is certain in parliament is that when an opposition party tables a motion of no confidence, that unites the party of government. And in this particular case, will also bring the DUP, so the Northern Ireland party on board because they do not want to see a general action. They certainly don't want to see Jeremy Corbyn as the prime minister.

CO: And so how will you be voting tomorrow?

TB: We'll be voting with the Labour Party. We have no confidence in the government. The Prime Minister has spent the last two and a half years working on a Brexit deal. She says this is the best deal that is available. Yet, when she puts it to members of parliament, it was defeated by no less than 230 votes — the largest defeat that any government has suffered for over 100 years.

CO: As you say, the government or her party will rally in support of Theresa May. But they don't support her deal. I mean they don't unanimously support her deal, as you just pointed out. So where does this leave things for Theresa May?

TB: She is in a real pickle. She has herself by setting some red lines at the beginning of this process ruled out engaging with the opposition parties. She has tried now we know unsuccessfully to secure the support of the people on the far-right of her party — people who want to see what I would describe as an extreme Brexit. And she hasn't managed to keep them on board, in fact, she was probably never going to get them on board because what they want is something that no sensible prime minister would want to deliver.

CO: They're going to support her for this vote, but then what? I mean someone has pointed out she has a very bad hand, and she's has poorly played it. But if you're going to keep with the metaphor of the card game, who else has any cards worth playing here?

TB: The one card which she could and should use, and it's the joker in her pack — she has so far refused to use it — is the idea of a people's vote. In other words, putting to the people the deal that she believes is the right one for the country, even though parliament has just rejected it by a majority of 230. Put that deal to the people in a vote and let them choose between her deal. And I would want to see the alternative given to people in that vote being staying in the European Union.

CO: But what you're really talking about is a second referendum, yes?

TB: Yes, we're talking about a second referendum, but I'd prefer not to use that term because if we were going to be accurate, well I would argue it's actually the third referendum on this subject. But actually, this would be the first time people have had an opportunity to assess what the Prime Minister has offered. And they will have clarity for instance that the price of leaving the EU is 39 billion pounds because that's what the government have negotiated. And if they don't like that, then they should have the opportunity in my view to vote instead to stay in the EU now that there's a greater degree of clarity about precisely what Brexit means.

CO: We just heard Theresa May after that the defeat of this plan. She said this vote tells us nothing about how or if this house recognises the results of the referendum vote. That a majority of people in the UK voted to leave the European Union. And she said that basically that this vote does not represent that. What would represent an understanding that that is the case? That the people of the UK did vote in favour of leaving the European Union?

TB: They did. The polls suggest now that if that vote were to take place, they would vote a different way. And what is very clear from the polls is that the demand from the public for them to have their say on the deal because they see the chaos, which frankly the prime minister is responsible for, and they could see that parliament is not going to come to a conclusion. That is the only option the Prime Minister has left.

CO: You can see how as we watch from outside, we are all very perplexed by this. And people in your country saying this is the worst political crises in decades — since the 20s since the 40s, and you've been through wars and they're still saying this is the worst. But it does seem like it's self-inflicted, doesn't it?

TB: It is entirely self-inflicted. The referendum campaign was one in which people were offered a free ticket, a free meal, a way out of all the economic challenges that the UK does face. They were offered a way out which didn't actually exist. And now that it's caught up with people, and the reality of Brexit, the reality of trying to negotiate the exit from a club of 28 countries is that the UK doesn't get everything that it wants, and suffers in consequence. Loses credibility from an international point of view, from a diplomatic point of view, endangers its security, and damages our economy.

CO: Just one last question dealing with the Official Opposition. We heard Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn talk about the sheer incompetence of the government. Does he have cards to play if we're going to keep with that metaphor?

TB: Well, the card that Jeremy Corbyn needs to play in many respects is identical to the card that the Prime Minister should play but has refused to. And so far, Jeremy Corbyn has also refused to play the one card that he has, and that is the idea of a people's vote. If we have the Labour Party as a whole on board with the other opposition parties and a number of Conservative members of parliament then that is something that commands a majority in the House of Commons and could be a way out of this almighty mess — this national embarrassment that, unfortunately, the Conservative Party with their obsession over Europe has brought the country to its knees.

CO: We will be watching, as the whole world is watching. Mr. Brake, I appreciate speaking with you tonight. Thank you.

TB: Thanks. Okay, bye.

JD: Tom Brake is a Liberal Democrat Member of British Parliament. We reached him in London.

[Music: Orchestral]

Saudi national flees

Guest: Aaron Beswick

JD: He was supposed to go on trial. His whereabouts, however, are a mystery. Mohammed Zuraibi Alzoabi is facing several criminal charges in Nova Scotia, including sexual assault. But the Saudi man failed to appear in court last week. It seems he might have fled the country, despite having his passport taken away. Aaron Beswick dug up the story for The Chronicle Herald. We reached him in Antigonish, Nova Scotia.

CO: Aaron, I know you recently spoke with Mohammed Zuraibi Alzoabi on Facebook. Where is he, first of all?

AARON BESWICK: Well, he won't say. Which I suppose a person in his situation one could understand that. So I don't know where he is.

CO: What did he say to you?

AB: The first thing I asked him was where he is? And he wouldn't say. I asked if he was in Canada? And he said probably not. And I asked again later in the conversation. And he said he couldn't tell me. I talked to him about the alleged crimes themselves, much of which I actually can't get into because there are publication bans in place, particularly with respect to the sexual assault case.

CO: But then he he's also said a couple of quite outrageous things, right?

AB: Yes, he did, yeah. I guess what I could say is he doesn't take responsibility for the sexual assault crime. He doesn't take the charges seriously. And he doesn't respect them. And he doesn't intend to ever come back and face them.

CO: And do you believe that he is in Saudi Arabia now?

AB: I would wouldn't jump to that conclusion. I don't know, he might very well still be in Canada. He does have friends in other places in Canada. And we don't know that he's gone to Saudi Arabia.

CO: You can't give us details, but he was facing charges of sexual assault, assault, forcible confinement, uttering threats, criminal harassment, dangerous driving, and assault with a weapon — being a vehicle. And these are two separate trials — two incidents during his time in Sydney.

AB: And two different victims as well.

CO: But he was granted bail — about 40,000 dollars — and he had to surrender his passport — his Saudi Arabian passport. So if he was able to leave the country, first of all, where did the money come from? And how could he leave without a passport?

AB: According to the Crown, the bail was paid in cash. Thirty-seven thousand five-hundred of it was paid in cash. And that came from the Saudi embassy. The other 5,000 or so was a 2007 Altima — a Nissan Altima — that he put up, which they weren't able to get, and I believe was crushed by a tow truck company. Saudi Embassy has if you look at it there are cases in the United States where the Saudi embassy has paid bail. And there's a number of cases in the United States. A newspaper in Oregon very recently looked at five cases in that state alone — the state of Oregon — where Saudi citizens that were charged with crimes there fled the jurisdiction. And most of them they had had their passports seized — like the Cape Breton Regional Police have Mr. Alzoabi’s passport; I can tell you that. They confirm that. So that's the question. If talk to an immigration lawyer, which I did, they'll tell you that it's pretty darn near impossible to get on a flight anywhere to another country without a passport, unless your embassy has issued you some form of travel document.

CO: And the cases in the United States — the other ones where Saudi Arabians, I guess students, were able to commit crimes or accused of crimes had bail posted and then appeared to have left. Was it also the case where they seem to have departed without their passports?

AB: Yes, a number of them it was. I mean one of them the bail was 500,000 dollars paid by the embassy there, and they were able to depart without their passports a number of them were. You know there are two issues here, Carol. There's the issue we have victims of very serious crimes that you know that it's not easy to go through the criminal justice system as victim who are now facing not getting to see their alleged violator or the alleged perpetrator of their crime face justice in the Canadian system. There's another problem, which is if he did leave Canada, and we don't know that, but if he did leave Canada, and if he was assisted by his embassy, then that's a violation of Canadian sovereignty and international norms.

CO: Just the picture that you’ve posted in the Chronicle Herald of Mr. Alzoabi wearing some glasses that say the drinks on me. Looks like quite the party boy. He said some pretty nasty things to people in person and about Canada. He's an outrageous kind of flamboyant character, isn’t he?

AB: He is. And there's more things than was even reported in that article. In his four years going to Cape Breton University, four years or five years was in Sydney, he racked up 68,000 dollars of motor vehicle fines, right? And I talked to a tow truck operator who told many of his vehicles. And what she said is backed up in the court documents is that he was just buying cars and driving them uninsured, unregistered, without a valid license. Sixty-eight thousand dollars’ worth of motor vehicle fines is a lot. And that also shows a pattern of behaviour. He said things to the manager of the tow truck company which also were quite disrespectful.

CO: Just a final question. Has this left a bit of a sour taste in people's mouths about this gentleman coming to Sydney from Saudi Arabia, and leaving all this this behind? Victims of crime and all these unpaid debts?

AB: I would imagine that it has. Sydney is actually very multicultural place, and it has you know foreign students from all around the world. And you know they are welcomed in that community. And the vast, vast majority of them contribute to the economy and contribute socially, and it's a great relationship in both ways. But in this instance yes, there'd be a sour taste about this individual.

CO: All right. We'll leave it there. Aaron, thank you.

AB: Thank you, Carol.

JD: Aaron Beswick is a reporter with The Chronicle Herald. We reached him in Antigonish, Nova Scotia. We did ask for a response from the Saudi embassy in Ottawa, but did not hear back before show time.

[Music: Indie rock]

Welsh steep hill

Guest: Gwyn Headley

JD: When Gwyn Headley launched his Guinness World Records challenge, he knew the competition was going to be steep. He was undeterred, however. Because Mr. Headley is convinced that a street in his hometown of Harlech, Wales — is the world's steepest. But for years, Guinness World Records has bestowed that title on another street, on the other side of the world — Baldwin Street, in Dunedin, New Zealand. Gwyn Headley thinks that's just flat wrong. We reached Mr. Headley in Harlech.

CO: Gwyn, why do you believe that your street in your hometown is the steepest street in the world?

GWYN HEADLEY: Well, putting aside patriotism and native pride and my lovely little town, I can't see how it can't be the steepest street in the world. We've just been doing very, very detailed surveying using a GMSS receiver, which is accurate to within one centimetre on a grid map, and accurate to within 10 centimetres of height. We've carried out 14 staging posts on the hill, which is just a little bit over a third of a mile long. And we are pretty certain that the data we have will knock the street in this country called New Zealand off its little perch. If you put down a brick on Baldwin street, it stays there. If you put down a brick on Ffordd Pen Llech, which is the name of our street, and I know that's quite hard to pronounce even for Canadians, the brick will roll down the street.

CO: Oh, come on!

GH: That's steep.

CO: No, come on! A brick! You’re saying a brick will roll down your street?

GY: Yes, and it's a public thoroughfare, which means cars can drive down it. And it struck me that when I was driving down, and I hadn't anti-lock brakes on my car, and I put my foot on the brake, and it just judded, and the car slid gently about twelve feet down the street. And that's when I started to look to find out how steep the street really was.

CO: Do people live on this street with the unpronounceable name?

GY: Oh yes, it's very pronounceable. But there are I think 14 or 16 houses on the street — some of them over 300 years old. People have lived there for centuries. The street dates from the 13th century because it led to the castle. It's then Northern approach to Harlech Castle, which was built in 1286.

CO: So not only do you have this steep street that you're competing with New Zealand for being the steepest, you have a castle on yours. They don't have a castle on theirs.

GY: They don't have a castle on their street. We've got a castle. We've got a song. We've got a lord. We even had a television station named after our town — HTV, Harlech Television — which is now part of ITV, which is the Independent Television. But yeah, it's a great little town, and it's very, very small. We've only got twelve hundred people living here. But we also have some of the finest views in Britain. It's a lovely, lovely place.

CO: What do you have to do to convince the Guinness people that, in fact, you do have the steepest street?

GY: Well, we've done this surveying by qualified surveyor. We've taken all the records. We will now do the number crunching so we can work out the grades and the gradient. We get all this sorted together and sorted out by the local council, which is a statutory body. They have to approve of the figures that we have created. We then have to have ten other pieces of documentation, which include witness reports, videos, photographs of the street, plans of the angle. We've got all this data, we put it all together, and then we submit it to Guinness World Records. And in three months, they come back and tell us whether we've got it or not.

CO: And you've been working with your friend, Myrddyn Phillips?

GY: [Corrects Carol’s pronunciation on a name that is hard to pronounce]

CO: Ok. This is a side story here. But I understand that you and Myrddyn have been recognized in another book as the dullest men in the United Kingdom.

GY: Absolutely. Yes, I'm extremely dull. And Myrddyn is slightly duller. Myrddyn’s claim to fame is that he surveys hills to see if they qualify as a mountain.

CO: But so why did you have to do to earn the distinction of being as dull as Myrddyn?

GY: Well, I've written several books on architectural follies — eccentric architecture. And I've seen over two and a half thousand follies in the UK and in the USA. And I write about them. It's a crime which I can't get over. I've just delivered my latest manuscript to English Heritage.

CO: It doesn't sound too, too dull. But back to your street, and your competition with New Zealand and Baldwin Street, they have signage. I mean this is a tourist attraction in Dunedin. They sign says Baldwin Street, world's steepest street. What will happen to Dunedin? What will happen to Baldwin Street if you win?

GY: Well, you know you're making me cry. I feel so sorry because I can't think they've got anything else to boast about. And they're going to have to take those street signs down, aren’t they?

CO: Or get a castle.

GY: They’re going to have to get a castle. I mean they're already saying they're going to try and steepen the street, which I think is a quite a nice idea. But it'll have to be steepened by quite a long way I think to match our steepest area. But you know they've had fun with it. I mean they've really exploited it very well, and full marks to them. I think that's excellent. But they're going to have to take second billing I'm afraid. Pity us because we're going to have to put up new signs, aren't we?

CO: Yes, you are.

GY: We’re going to have to pay for all these signs saying the steepest street in the world.

CO: And you're gonna have to teach people how to pronounce the name of the street.

GY: How to pronounce the name of the street. [Pronounces] It’s very easy.

CO: All right. Easy for you to say. Gwyn, it’s great to talk to you. And I don't find it dull at all. Thank you.

GY: Oh, how kind. Thank you, Carol.

CO: Bye.

JD: We reached Gwyn Headley in Harlech, Wales. And to see some photographs of Mr. Headley and his merry crew measuring the grade on Ffordd Pen Lech, head to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient]

Silicon Valley cats

JD: In the polarized world of Silicon Valley's housing crunch, Tina and Louise are among the lucky ones. Despite all the Teslas and tech billionaires in the valley, an estimated 75-hundred people are surviving without shelter in the area. But Tina and Louise — a jobless duo — have sunk their claws into a cosy home. It's a 400-square foot casita in San Jose. 'Casita' is the local term for a backyard apartment. And this tiny one rents for nearly $2000 (Canadian) a month. That might seem steep for two tenants who don't have any income. It may seem even steeper when you find out they aren't just unemployed; they're also cats. Yes, Tina and Louise are the pets of 18-year-old Victoria Amith. Ms. Amith has gone off to college, leaving her father, Troy Good, to tend to the Maine Coon-Bombay siblings. Sadly it seems that either Tina or Louise, or perhaps both, don't get along with Mr Good's girlfriend's dog, which explains the need for a $2,000 apartment. To some. Jennifer Loving, however, still needs convincing. Ms Loving runs an organization that's trying to end homelessness in the area. She's describing Tina and Louise's cat condo as, quote, "peak Silicon Valley. It really does highlight the tremendous inequality. We have thousands of people in our street, and we're paying to make sure that our cats have a place to live." Unquote.

Part two: International Criminal Court acquittal, stem cell match

International Criminal Court acquittal

Guest: Janet Anderson

JD: For years, they faced accusations of crimes against humanity. Today, they walked free. The former president of Ivory Coast, Laurent Gbagbo, and one of his close allies, Charles Ble Goude, were being tried at the International Criminal Court. The charge were connected to post-election violence, and the 2010 attacks left 3,000 people dead. Prosecutors charged the men with orchestrating a campaign of murder, rape and, quote, "other inhuman acts." The pair maintained their innocence throughout the unrest and the trial. Here is Charles Ble Goude speaking with Carol in December 2010.

SOUNDCLIP

CO: You know that people are afraid of you. They believe that you are giving the orders for those who have been dragged from their homes at night. Are you in charge of these death squads?

CHARLES BLE GOUDE: I’d like people to know that they don't know who they're speaking about. I'm not the one responsible for what they are saying. I’d like people to discover who Ble Goude is. I am not a chief in the an army. I'm just mobilizing people like Ghandi did it for India. I'm not killing people. I'm sorry.

JD: That was Charles Ble Goude, speaking to Carol in December 2010, before he was put on trial by the ICC for crimes against humanity. Earlier today, he and former Ivory Coast president Laurent Gbagbo were acquitted — their case dismissed before the defence even presented its side. Janet Anderson is the editor of The Justice Tribune. We reached her in The Hague.

CO: Janet, can you describe the scene in the International Criminal Court room today as this ruling came down?

JANET ANDERSON: Well, inside the courtroom the visitor's gallery was packed. The supporters of Gbagbo and Ble Goude erupted when they heard the decision from the judges. And then the judge had to be very severe on them and call for order. Outside, you already had right from early in the morning supporters gathering, wearing the if worrying colors — even somebody with a bottle of champagne ready to celebrate. Singing, dancing, and always hoping — they're actually always there for any big event that went on at the ICC. But this was obviously the biggest one that they could ever have expected.

CO: And this is to celebrate well the dismissal of this case against former president of Ivory Coast Laurent Gbagbo, and his right-hand man Charles Ble Goude. But what about the victims of that violence in 2010? Three thousand people have died. So many people hurt. I just was talking to Charles Ble Goude in that clip about the death squads that people had experienced. Where were the victims today?

JA: There were no victims around to talk. Victims have been appearing during the prosecution's case — often protected witnesses. So you don't know their individual identities, and giving very harrowing testimony on what actually happened at the time. And there’s a victims’ lawyer representing them in the court. And she has expressed how devastated she is. So she's already said that she's going to fight the decision. But really it was a day for Gbagbo, Ble Goude, and their supporters.

CO: Can you remind us what Laurent Gbagbo and Charles Ble Goude stood accused of doing?

JA: Well, this was all connected to the post-election violence that erupted in Cote d'Ivoire after elections at the end of 2010. There were several different elements that they were accused of to do with firing on demonstrators, to do with targeting specific people who were protesting, and the prosecution was trying to argue that in combination, of all of these deaths on one side of this political conflict amounted to crimes against humanity. There were also deaths on the other side, but the prosecution hasn't yet managed to bring any case against the supporters of Ouattara, who is currently the president of Ivory Coast.

CO: This is a case where the prosecution was able to put out its evidence, present its case, and there was no defence case even presented before it was dismissed. What do you make of that?

JA: It's devastating for the prosecution that they could spend so long investigating. They could spend so long with Gbagbo and Ble Goude actually here in the Hague, in a detention centre. So long putting their evidence forward both from victims and from key insider witnesses as well — those who were actually close to these men, and we're in the highest circles. They put all of that evidence out, and then the defence hasn't even put its side of the case at all. The defence only argued that there was actually no case to answer in terms of the charges that these men were facing. And two out of the three judges said you're right, there is no case to answer — so absolutely devastating blow to the prosecution.

CO: Why was the prosecution's case so weak?

JA: There are different arguments about this. Some people put it in the context of see what happens to the president and the vice president of Kenya and that cases against them didn't go through. Look at what happened to Jean-Pierre Bemba, the former vice president of the Democratic Republic of Congo. He was acquitted. It starts to look like a fundamental structural weakness in the prosecution in terms of how they have done their investigations, how they have put cases together. That they have not built up cases sufficiently. They've taken I don't know the kind of evidence that would be put together by a human rights organization to say bad things happened and to say who they guessed was responsible for it. And that doesn't cut it in a court of law. What you need in these highly complex cases is you need real evidence showing exactly how specific individuals are connected to specific crimes. Now, the prosecution obviously assumed that it was putting all of that together sufficiently. But it's been proved again and again, and again now that the prosecution hasn't got it together.

CO: There are many who are opposed to even the existence of the International Criminal Court. So what does this do for the court? What message does it send?

JA: There are many who regard the courts as a whole. And as a whole, this particular decision tarnishes the whole of the court as an apparently ineffective institution. Some countries who are not state parties they don't belong to the court. They object to the court. They think that the court is impinging on state sovereignties. It will tend to support those arguments, particularly thinking about the United States, but also Russia, China, India, some of the biggest nations in the world don't support this court. And have no real intention of ever joining it. And this shows a weak court. It shows maybe a fair court in the sense that somebody was acquitted. But, essentially, it shows a court that is really not up to the job.

CO: All right, we will leave it there. Janet, I appreciate speaking with you tonight. Thank you.

JA: Thank you. Bye-bye.

JD: Janet Anderson is the editor of The Justice Tribune. We reached her in The Hague.

[Music: Ambient]

Stem cell match

Guest: Susan Doherty

JD: Tonight, Susan Doherty is flying to the UK — to have drinks with a man she's never met. This is, however, no romance. His name is William Ashby-Hall — and he saved her life. Three years ago Ms. Doherty was diagnosed with a rare autoimmune disease. She needed a stem cell transplant. After a long search, a match was found, all the way across the Atlantic — a match that would have been even more unlikely, if Mr. Ashby-Hall had lived here in Canada. That's because of rules in Canada that restrict some sexually active gay men from donating blood and/or bone marrow. We reached Susan Doherty in Montreal.

CO: Susan, I know you are about to get on a plane tonight to go to the United Kingdom to meet your stem cell donor. What are you anticipating about that meeting?

SUSAN DOHERTY: Well, this has been two years in the making. I had my stem cell transplant on June 2^nd, 2016. And a day has not gone by where I haven't wanted to connect with him, and look him in the eye and say thank you for giving me this second chance.

CO: And how did you get to connect with him?

SD: I sent him four letters. One after 100 days, which is the first hurdle of being a survivor, then I sent him another letter at one year, then I sent him a letter at 19 months, and then on June 2^nd, 2018, I sent him another letter and asked if we could meet? And he didn't get any of my letters until August of 2018. So I heard from him on September the 5^th, and he sent me a long list of ways to contact him. And he couldn't wait to get on the phone and compare notes.

CO: So what you're describing is the protocol with a donor that they don't tell you who the donor is. But after a certain period of time, you can make contact if they want to make contact. Is that right?

SD: Well, the international rules dictate that you have to be a two-year survivor before you make contact. And that's just because the death rate is so high, and it would be quite psychologically difficult, emotionally difficult if you were a donor and you find out that the patient died soon after the transplant.

CO: You've had a phone conversation then with this man, William Ashby-Hall, is that right?

SD: Yes! Oh my gosh, what a wonderful man! I mean he jumped right in. I mean it's quite extraordinary the way it the way it worked. By the way, it is so easy to be on the register. It's a cheek swab. And so he gave his cheek swab, which is called HLA typing, and it went into the NHS database. And when the results came up, boom! There was this match with this Canadian woman. So he was called 24 hours later after the HL typing was determined to say you have this opportunity to save a Canadian woman's life. And he jumped.

CO: You were diagnosed with this very rare auto immune disease in 2015. And what was it? How sick were you at the time that you got this this transplant?

SD: I mean when I was diagnosed in August of 2015 it's this disease called HLH, which has a chemotherapy protocol. So I did two and a half months of chemo and steroids. I had 77 days of perfect wellness, and then the wheels fell off the bus. And each HLH came roaring back into my life with lymph nodes and organ damage. And then we scheduled the stem cell transplant.

CO: And how difficult is it to get a match for you? I mean this man is in the United Kingdom. How difficult was it to find someone who could donate for you?

SD: Well, there are 30 million people on the register, and there was one match for me — which is pretty incredible.

CO: What do you know about this man that that you're going to meet tonight, or as soon as you can?

SD: You know, I don't know all that much yet. I know that Doherty is an Irish name. He did tell me that his grandmother is Irish. He was 23 years old when he went to give blood at the NHS, and then he was 25 when we first spoke on the phone. So I think it's incredible that a 23-year-old man is giving blood. And I think do you know it's just a real shout out to be on the register.

CO: If this man had been a Canadian, would he have been on the registry?

SD: No, he wouldn't. William Ashby-Hall is married to Michael Ashby-Hall, and the rules in the UK are different. You know all blood is tested for HIV. And in Canada, men who have sex with men are not permitted to give blood for 12 months, or be on the register for 12 months.

CO: After having had sex with another man.

SD: Exactly. Exactly.

CO: And so if your donor had lived in Canada, he was married to a man, he was sexually active with his partner, and he wouldn't have been able to donate to you.

SD: That's exactly right.

CO: What else do you want to change about that? Because this has become something that has mattered to you a lot now that you've learned that of this man were living in Canada — was Canadian — you wouldn't have had this life-saving opportunity?

SD: Yes, I do think that the registry in Canada, they need to take a second look. And they should be admitting you know gay men onto the registry.

CO: As other countries like the UK do.

SD: Exactly. It's a discrimination to prevent people from being on the list because they're sexually active.

CO: Did you have any problems when you learned that your donor was a sexually active gay man?

SD: No, I was thrilled actually. I really I thought it was an absolutely fantastic layer to my already layered life.

CO: So you're going off to meet and his is mate, and probably crack some champagne.

SD: Yes. Yes.

CO: But in general, how has this donation — this generosity of this man — how has it changed your own life?

SD: Yeah, I live every day with gratitude. I mean that sounds like a pat statement. But you know how many people get to have a second chance like this? So it was really important to me to meet him, to look him in the eye, and say you know you've you saved a life.

CO: Well Susan, I'm very happy for you. And I think it's going to be a great reunion.

SD: Thank you so much for taking the time to call me, and have a good night.

CO: You too. Bye-bye.

SD: Ok, bye.

JD: Susan Doherty is a stem cell transplant recipient. We reached her in Montreal.

[Music: Folk]

FOA: Carol Channing

JD: Her raspy voice and huge smile were unmistakable. And while you may know her simply as Dolly — Carol Channing was so much more. The legendary American Broadway actress and singer has died this morning in Rancho Mirage, California. She was 97 years old. Ms. Channing began her ascent into stardom in 1949 as the diamond-loving show girl in the musical "Gentleman Prefer Blondes". But it was her 1964 Tony Award-winning role as Dolly Levi in "Hello, Dolly!" that cemented her legacy. It defined her career — and she would go on to play the role thousands of times over the decades. Thirty years after she first played Dolly, Ms. Channing performed the show in Toronto, and that invited a call from “As It Happens”. So here, from our archives, here is Ms. Channing in conversation with guest host Ann Medina in August of 1994.

SOUNDCLIP

ANN MEDINA: I just want to say first, welcome to Toronto, and welcome to Canada.

CAROL CHANNING: Oh, thank you. It's my sixth time here.

AM: You're sixth time!

CC: Yes, it is. Oh, maybe more even.

AM: Well, are you are you sick though of being told that you have done Dolly so many times — more than 4,000 times — that now you are Dolly in people's minds?

CC: Oh, that's wonderful. I mean they believed me.

AM: They certainly do believe you.

CC: You know, that's the greatest compliment an actor could have. Not that you're acting, but that you are that.

AM: This present production, how different is it then when you go back to the original when some 30 years ago? Does it feel different, and forgetting your age difference, just the way it's done also?

CC: It feels different, yes. Because I've grown, but we wouldn't change the script, and we wouldn't change the music or lyrics, or the choreography because I think that would be sacrilege. I think it would just be — and it is something that happened at the turn of the century — and it was meant to be a bygone era.

AM: But certainly, for example, the costumes are as sumptuous and you know…

CC: Oh, they’re brand-new, yes.

AM: Glamorous. And they certainly go against… here we are just coming out of the recession, you know? And everything is simple, everything is pared down, and then you come out…

CC: Oh, I see. I never thought of that. I hope we are coming out of the recession. Do you really think so?

AM: Well, when people watch your play or your musical, and listen to “Hello Dolly” with all those costumes, they must feel that they're out of it.

CC: Oh gee, you must have enjoyed it! I'm so happy!

AM: When you think back of I don't know I read one place that one of your proudest moments was when you made Nixon's hate list. Was that a misquote, or is that accurate? It goes from Dolly to Nixon's hate list, but it is the same Carol Channing.

CC: Oh, I see. I was first on the list. There were no A's or B's, and all I can think of — I don't know why and what it was about — but I gave Mrs. Nixon a diamond the day before. It was right during Watergate. And she said oh, I can keep this. And all we could think was that she had the diamond appraised. That Nixon had the diamond appraised.

JD: That’s Carol Channing telling the story of giving a fake diamond to U.S. President Richard Nixon's wife. Carol Channing, Broadway star, died today. She was 97 years old.

[Music: Ambient]

Part three: Nairobi attack, Gdansk mayor killed

Freeland China

JD: Canada is seeking mercy for Robert Schellenberg. Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland says she's formally asked for clemency for the Canadian citizen after he was sentenced to death in China for smuggling drugs. China seems reluctant to relent. Chinese representatives have accused Canada of double standards, and have called out Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for, quote, "irresponsible remarks." Minister Freeland took questions on the issue today in St-Hyacinthe Quebec.

SOUNDCLIP

CHRYSTIA FREELAND: We have already spoken with China's ambassador to Canada, and requested clemency. Canada's position when it comes to the death penalty is consistent, and a very long-standing. As Canadians know, we do not have the death penalty in Canada. We believe it is inhumane and inappropriate. And wherever the death penalty is considered with regard to a Canadian, we speak out against it — and, indeed, with regard to others. And that is what we are doing here. I would also like to say with the case of Mr. Schellenberg, It's important for us to remember that we're talking about a human being, about a person. I spoke yesterday with Mr. Schellenberg’s father. And it was a very emotional conversation for him, as people might imagine. And I'd like to say to him, to the Schellenberg family, and I I think I speak for all Canadians that we really understand how difficult the situation is. And I think the Schellenberg family has our country's sympathy.

JD: Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland in St-Hyacinthe, Quebec.

[Music: Sombre]

Nairobi attack

Guest: Simon Crump

JD: The attack in Kenya's capital began in the afternoon. By nightfall Kenyan police were still battling the gunmen. Police say it began with a bomb blast targeting three vehicles outside a bank, and a suicide bombing in a luxury hotel-office complex in Nairobi. As we go to air, officials are yet to release the casualty toll. But the Islamic terrorist group Al-Shabaab say they're behind the attack. As of airtime, as many as 11 people are believed killed — according to multiple news sources citing a mortuary worker and a person involved with security at the hotel. Simon Crump works in the compound where the shooting took place. We reached him earlier today in Nairobi.

CO: Simon, at what point did you realize that something very serious was going on outside your office doors?

SIMON CRUMP: Well, I think really basically as soon as we heard the explosions, followed by a quick succession of gunfire fire. We knew something not good was happening outside.

CO: What did you think it was?

SC: I knew was an explosion. I wasn't sure. My first so of instinct was I thought it might have been a car bomb at one of the embassies which is near our office. But when I looked out the window, that sort of area of town seemed fine. So then I started thinking that perhaps it was a bit closer to home than I realized.

CO: When did you realize that there was something really quite large going on quite close to you?

SC: You know within probably a minute of the explosion, we ran out to the sort of atrium area outside the sort of office where we can sort of see into the compound you know closer to where the hotel, which is where all the drama was happening. And just seeing you know masses of people running and fleeing in panic. That's when we realized that there was something happening within this compound. I wasn't sure exactly where.

CO: What did people say out in the street about what was going on?

SC: Look, the only thing that people said was run, get out of here, just go. In that sort of moment of time, I sort of thought you know maybe it's probably not the best thing to run since I don't know what exactly is happening or where it's coming from or who it is. It might be actually better to barricade myself in the building in the office.

CO: After the first loud explosions, what else did you hear as to this attack on the hotel complex?

SC: It was just gunfire. And then a little bit later, another sort of explosion. And then just a lot more sort of gunfire — a lot of sort of shotguns or quite powerful rifles — what sounded like powerful rifles going off. You know there's something happening, but it's frustrating because you just don't know what it is.

CO: Could you contact anybody outside? Did you have any phone contact with those who could give you an indication of what was going on?

SC: I contacted my boss in London. I reached out to a few foreign journalists who were in town to sort of see if they knew what was happening. There's obviously a lot of stuff happening on social media, but not looking on social media because you just don't know what's real and what's not.

CO: So you barricaded yourself in with anybody else, or just you?

SC: No, we were three. It wasn't until police or the soldiers came that we realized there was a fourth person with us, but she was in two rooms across. We weren't sure who was at the door, but then once we sort of heard her shoes walking across the tiles, and realized that she was safe, we knew that probably the people who were at the door were safe for us as well.

CO: And so tell us about when the police arrived at the door. Did you believe it was the police? Were you concerned about who was trying to get you to open up?

SC: Yes, very concerned because you know who's coming to the door. We need to know that is a safe person. It's quite nerve-wracking because you just don't know whether the noises you're hearing, whether it's people, whether it's police, whether it's terrorists, you just don't know what those noises are.

CO: And what did the police want you to do?

SC: There were several doors that we put between us and the main door to the area of the building were in, so they wanted us to go away while they broke the door down with fire extinguishers and the like. And then once we came out, we had to put our hands above our heads, make sure that we had our phones in our pockets, and nothing in our hands.

CO: This attack on the hotel complex was still going on as you were exiting the office complex. Could you hear the gunfire still?

SC: Yes, very much. And the security personnel were very conscious about making sure the coast was as clear as possible before taking us out. And even once we sort of got outside a little bit to safety, there were more shots fired, more scrambles to cover.

CO: The place that was attacked, Al-Shabab, the terrorist organization from Somalia, has claimed responsibility. But the hotel is it called DusitD2, is that the name of that complex?

SC: The complex it's called 14 Riverside, it's a mixed-use development. So there's a hotel in the middle, but then there's four other buildings, which are corporate office blocks. But the focus of the attack was on the on the hotel, which is in the middle.

CO: And how close is that to your office building?

SC: Well, it’s a very tight compound. So it's you know it's 10 metres away.

CO: What have you learned since about what was going on in that hotel?

SC: It sounds like it was a couple of terrorist attacks, or a couple of people suicide sort of bombers or attackers. That there were seven or eight or other times I've heard four sort of active shooters that have potentially taken a few hostages inside the hotel. That's all I know. I must be honest, it's only from what I've heard on the ground. I've been more focused about you know looking after myself and the people that I was with.

CO: What we’ve heard so far is that this coordinated terrorist attack by al-Shabaab, they claimed responsibility. Four to six gunmen, according to witnesses, and many people are remembering as this goes on what happened not many years ago — 2013 — that the Westgate Mall attack in Nairobi. A very similar operation, gunmen, grenades, the attack on a heavily populated place — lots of people shopping. Are you hearing from others in Nairobi tonight making that comparison?

SC: I'm sure that will come up in the news reports and discussions in the next day — the next 24 to 48 hours. But at this stage, people are just more worried about their loved ones who might have been inside.

CO: And in 2013, when the Westgate Mall was attacked, it had a lasting effect on people — their feeling of security in this city. What effect do you think this attack will have on people who live and work the way you do?

SC: Well, we've been quite lucky in Nairobi. So I've been here five years, and obviously you're aware of the security issues, and the fact that hotels and corporate office blocks and shopping centers are hard targets. But I think with we've had a false sense of security because you know you sort of got through the beep machine, you get you get frisked, and you have your bag x-rayed. What this will do is just remind people that you know there is sort of you know a terrorist group in the neighboring countries that you know are hell bent on making people suffer. But I think I'm definitely still coming down from the shock and the adrenaline of this whole attack, and this whole situation. I'll probably take a few days to sort of process, and then realize what exactly it is that I've been through. You know, at this stage, I'm very much you know keep calm and carry on and go back to work tomorrow.

CO: Do you think that the whole experience hasn't quite sunk in yet?

SC: No, definitely not. I think I'm still very much processing it or haven't even started to process it.

CO: All right. Simon, we'll let you get on with your evening, and to have a chance get a bite to eat and calm down a bit from all of that. But I appreciate you speaking with us tonight. Thank you.

SC: No, you're very welcome. Have a good evening.

CO: Take care.

SC: Bye

JD: Simon Crump was barricaded in his office in Nairobi when a large-scale attack erupted in Nairobi today. We reached him earlier today at his home in Nairobi. Police do now say that they have regained control of the hotel. For more on this story, go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Sombre]

FTR: external heart machine

JD: Twenty-four-year-old Rebecca Henderson truly wears her heart on her sleeve. Unlike most people you could say that about, in her case, that description is nearly as true literally as it is figuratively. After Ms. Henderson was diagnosed with cancer of the heart in 2017, she underwent radical surgery. Her heart was removed last year. Since then, she has depended on an artificial heart machine, which, as she told the BBC, quote, "I carry around in a rucksack". This month marks a year that she has been cancer-free, which means she is now eligible to receive a donor heart. She is on a transplant list, and could receive her new heart in weeks. Here's Ms. Henderson describing what it's been like since her illness and the surgery. The sound you'll hear in the background is the pumping of that artificial heart.

SOUNDCLIP

BECCA HENDERSON: Hi, I'm Becca. I'm 24, and I no longer have a biological heart. If there was no machine, I'd be dead. There's no simple way around it. I've got all the usual kind of dreams that people my age have, you know? I want to get married, and have children, and have a house, and my own rescue greyhound. But, equally, there's always going to be the knowledge that things like falling in love and making best friends takes a really long time. And there are sometimes days that I wonder do I have that much time left? And do I have enough time to say to everybody who I love to say thank you to all of them? And to say how much I love them. I'm slightly crazily, or perhaps ingeniously, I'm not sure which yet, going back to uni now. And I'm doing that taking my mum and dad is 24 hour carers. Because if anything goes on with the machine, they're the ones who can do the changeover in four minutes, and save my life. Going back to Uni it reminds me of what I've got to look forward to. It reminds me of how lucky I am to be alive.

JD: For the record, that was Rebecca Henderson of Bicester, England, speaking with the BBC about her artificial heart.

[Music: Ambient]

FOA: Cecile Kyenge

JD: Cecile Kyenge has the honour of having been Italy's first black cabinet minister. Sadly, however, that position and distinction was accompanied by a barrage of racism. Yesterday, an Italian court sentenced Senator Roberto Calderoli of Italy's right-wing The League party to 18 months in prison for comparing Kyenge to an orangutang. It's a suspended sentence, so it's unclear whether Senator Calderoli will actually serve that time. But on Facebook, Ms. Kyenge called it an encouraging sign in the fight against racism. From our archives, this is Cecile Kyenge, in conversation with “As It Happens” guest host, Helen Mann in September, 2018.

SOUNDCLIP

CECILE KYENGE: when you see a political leader who compares you as a monkey, for me it was very, very sad. I have a daughter. I have a family. And to see my daughter, my family, to see all this member do it’s not correct. And the first institution was supposed to protect me. it was the Italian government, but it's not the same because they give me only bodyguards. And since today, I am in a protection program. But it's not enough.

HELEN MANN: What kind of threats are you getting? Why do you need bodyguards?

CK: When in Italy at the government since today, many people wait for me and want to attack me. Not only because I'm black woman and in the political, but because I am a symbol for migration. And this is very dangerous for me. And in some occasions, I receive a physical attack.

HM: You were once at a public event where people threw bananas at you. How did the public at large react to that?

CK: Yes. You know that many Italians are very shocked for this one.

HM: You mentioned that you have a daughter. She must be very proud that you know, on the one hand, you are Italy's first black minister, and that you are speaking out about these things. But when she sees the attacks on you, what do you say to her?

CK: It's difficult to explain them. But my daughter is very intelligent. And my daughter say every day to me that I must do my work. And if I'm in the right way, everybody one day can understand. They are strong. They are very strong.

JD: Cecile Kyenge is a Member of European Parliament and a former cabinet minister in Italy. She spoke with “As It Happens” guest host Helen Mann in September, 2018.

[Music: Ambient]

Gdansk mayor killed

Guest: Karolina Stubilska

JD: Gdansk is in mourning tonight. On Sunday night, the Polish city's mayor, Pawel Adamowicz, was stabbed in the chest at a charity concert. He died yesterday in hospital. Mayor Adamowicz is being remembered for his liberal views, his support of migrants and LGBTQ rights, and as a vocal critic of the ruling right-wing party in Poland. Now, there are worries that his death will create further division in an already-polarized country. Karolina Stubilska is the president of the Migrant Support Centre, that is an NGO that worked closely with the mayor. We reached Ms. Stubilska in Gdynia, near Gdansk.

CO: Ms. Stubilska, I'm sorry for your loss.

KAROLINA STUBILSKA: Thank you very much. Thank you on my behalf, and of course, on the behalf of all the Gdansk citizens and Polish citizens. So thank you for your words.

CO: I know you worked closely with Mayor Adamowicz, and how are people processing it? How are they dealing with this murder?

KS: I think that it's really, really very big shock for everyone. We never imagined that something like that could happen here in Poland. And we always felt that Poland and to our city is a safe place. And we could see that also in the behaviour of Mayor Adamowicz, who never had personal security. He was always very close to the people, to the citizens of Gdansk, and he always highlighted that this is very important for him to meet with people, and to face them, and to be very close to them. So I guess that we are all of overwhelmed with what happened. And in a very, of course, negative way.

CO: You are the head of a migrant support centre. And in Poland, this is a country that that has a government — a very popular right-wing government that has rejected the idea of welcoming immigrants and refugees. But you found an ally in Mayor Adamowicz, is that right?

KS: Yes, that's true. I. I started to cooperate with him around five or six years ago, when my organization was establishing. And until now, we are the only NGO here in the Pomeranian region who is totally dedicated to support migrants and the refugees living here in our region. And it was very difficult because we didn't, and still don't, have any migration or integration policy on a national level. And, of course, migrants are coming to Poland, and refugees are coming to Poland because it's totally natural. And Mayor Adamowicz was the first one here in Poland, the first politician on the local level, who decided to do something for migrants, and to do something to integrate migrants and refugees.

CO: So now, was Mayor Adamowicz, was he facing any threats? Was it a dangerous position to take in favour of being so open about not just with migrants and refugees, but he was very accepting of LGBTQ minorities. He was outspokenly in favour of all kinds of people being welcome in Gdansk. Was he faced with any threats because of that?

KS: Of course, because for some time now here in Poland, after the government has changed for the Law and Justice Party, Poland became a place where you can in a very free and open a way use hate speech and talk in a very negative way about other people. And even Mr. Adamowicz he faced threats from the Internet from the far-right wing organizations. For example, some time ago, the they created this post about his political death, and the court decided that it's nothing. It's like they spoke their minds. And in Poland, you can speak your mind. But we became a country where speaking your mind means that you are spreading the hate speech. And because of the things that he was doing, and because the things that he was supporting, of course he was criticized all the time. But he was always saying that not people who are sharing love, and positive emotions, and openness should be afraid. Those that are spreading hate should be afraid.

CO: We have a few more details since he was murdered on Sunday at that event, that fundraising event, that charity event. That the alleged attacker is a 27-year-old man with a history of crime and mental illness. And it doesn't on the face of it appear to be politically-motivated. What do we know about why he felt compelled to stab your mayor to death?

KS: Of course, I don't know. I guess the court will be the institution to explain that. And I hope they will do it. But most of the people now through the media they want to create or to push this opinion that he only did that because he had some mental issues, and that was the only reason why he did that. That when he attacked Adamowicz, he yelled to the crowds and to the audience that he is doing that because he was in jail for a few years, and that because the Civic Platform Party, which Adamowicz was representing for many years, they were against him, and they were torturing him, and things like that. And I do believe that if you are letting people feel open with their hate, and feel open to speak about it this hate, and to use hate speech and, be aggressive. I do believe that people can feel encouraged to do things like that. I'm not saying that anybody is responsible for what happened. Of course, the man is responsible. But maybe if in Poland, we would promote openness and respect for each other, even if you are not agreeing with me, maybe this wouldn't happen? This is the question that probably I will ask myself many times, and to other people thinking like I do will ask themselves.

CO: We will leave it there. Ms. Stubilska, I appreciate you speaking with us, and telling us about your mayor.

KS: Thank you so much. Thank you for that conversation with you.

CO: Goodnight.

KS: Goodnight.

JD: Karolina Stubilska is the president of the NGO Migrant Support Centre in Gdansk. We reached her in Gdynia.

[Music: Piano]

Mona Lisa eyes

JD: It's always flattering when you catch the attention of someone famous. And when it feels like that celebrity is actually staring at you as you walk across the room -- well, that's another level of thrill. "She's totally looking right into my eyes, and smiling weirdly!" you whisper to yourself. Well, listen. I'm sorry, but she's not looking at you. In fact, she's not looking right at anyone. And not just because she's 400 years old, and a painting. I'm referring to the famous "Mona Lisa Effect" — the feeling that the eyes of someone in a portrait are following you. And we all know the Mona Lisa. But what we didn't know -- despite millions of people insisting on it -- was whether the Mona Lisa Effect actually applies to the Mona Lisa. You know who does know? Gernot Horstmann and Sebastian Loth, of Bielefeld University in Germany. And in their new study, they're not mincing words. Quote: "There is no doubt about the existence of the Mona Lisa effect -- it just does not occur with Mona Lisa herself." Unquote. How did they determine this so definitively? Science. You probably want me to elaborate. Fine. They placed viewers at various distances, and showed them the painting on a computer screen. Then they used rulers to establish, empirically, where the viewers thought Ms. Lisa was looking. And they report that no matter how the painting was zoomed in on, or positioned on the screen, quote, "Remarkably, viewers judged Mona Lisa's gaze as directed to their right-hand side." Unquote. Well, that's what happens when someone asks a question no one else thought to ask: sometimes, it turns out the answer was staring just to the right of our face all along.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

January 15, 2019 episode transcript

More Stories Like This