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 February 21, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Angeline Tetteh-Wayoe

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello I'm Carol Off.

ANGELINE TETTEH-WAYOE: Good evening. I'm Angeline Tetteh-Wayoe. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

ATW: Tonight...

CO: Mistakes were made. By Canada's top civil servant says those mistakes were in the Global and Mail's story about the Prime Minister's Office putting pressure on the former Attorney General -- because he saw nothing of the sort.

ATW: Infernal combustion. Dozens are dead in Dhaka, Bangladesh, after fire rips through a densely populated neighbourhood -- with roads too narrow for firefighters to get there in time.

CO: Un-true crime. Weeks after actor Jussie Smollett reported being attacked by two men spouting racist and homophobic insults, Chicago police have laid charges against Mr. Smollett himself.

ATW: Keeping the faith, barely. As an unprecedented conference begins at the Vatican, a former advisor to the Pope on sexual abuse in the Catholic Church says she's skeptical it will produce real change.

CO: He gave us our Monkee's worth. In the '60s, the late Peter Tork was a real musician who was derided for joining a fake band -- but when a new generation of fans saw "The Monkees" they were believers.

ATW: And...you can take that from the banks. And when Martin Bushell found it, he did -- which is when he learned it was the oldest skull ever discovered on the banks of the River Thames. As It Happens. The Thursday Edition. Radio that decided to call him up -- for old Thames' sake.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: 'I'm sad for my city,' says Chicago writer who doubted Jussie Smollett's story

Justice Committee: Wernick

Guest: Kady O’Malley

ATW: Canada's top civil servant walked into an Ottawa committee today -- with a lot to get off his chest. The reason for Michael Wernick's testimony was the ongoing reports of alleged political interference in the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. And he got to that. But first, Mr. Wernick wanted to make a bigger point about the state of political discourse in the country.

SOUNDCLIP

MICHAEL WERNICK: I worry about my country right now. I'm deeply concerned about my country right now. And it's politics -- and where it's headed. I worry about foreign interference in the coming election -- and we're working hard on that. I worry about the rising tide of incitements to violence -- when people use terms like "treason" and "traitor" and "open discourse" -- those are the words that lead to assassination. I'm worried that somebody is going to be shot in this country this year during the political campaign. I think it's totally unacceptable that a Member of the Parliament of Canada would incite people to drive trucks over people after what happened in Toronto last summer. Totally unacceptable, and I hope that you as parliamentarians are going to condemn that. I worry about the reputations of honourable people who've served their country being besmirched and dragged through the market square. I worry about the trolling from the vomitorium of social media entering the open media arena. Most of all, I worry about people losing faith in the institutions of governance of this country. And that's why these proceedings are so important.

ATW: That was Privy Council clerk Michael Wernick speaking at a justice committee meeting in Ottawa today. In that statement, he's referring to comments by Conservative senator David Tkachuk on Tuesday in which he told a group of protesters quote, "I want you to roll over every Liberal left in this country." After his statement, Mr. Wernick addressed stories in the Globe and Mail which allege that aides to the Prime Minister including Mr. Wernick -- tried to push former Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould to defer the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. He said he never pressured the minister -- or saw anyone else do so. Kady O'Malley is a reporter who's been covering the story. We reached her in Ottawa.

CO: Kady before we get to what happened and what we now know or don't know about SNC-Lavalin -- we Michael Wernick come out swinging, talking about people getting shot, what was your reaction when you saw that?

KADY O'MALLEY: Well definitely shock and surprise on my part, and I think pretty much everyone who was watching it. When you hear the clerk of the Privy Council -- and sort of historically these don't tend to be civil servants that come out and express such colourful opinions I guess, usually they're the ones who are answering questions about the estimates. They're not the people who are kind of coming out and giving -- it's almost sounding an alarm. It sounds like he thinks this is one of -- this scandal, this story, this controversy -- it's something that is eroding people's faith in government and in sort of the institution itself. And if you sort of look at it from that vantage point, it makes sense that he'd want to take advantage of a situation like this to really hammer that message home.

CO: And there's one thing, that all of these things were pointed out by critics from the Conservatives, that Mr. Wernick came out swinging like this in order to distract -- to take attention away from the case at hand which is what possible interference, inappropriate interference, was there in the decisions around SNC-Lavalin. So did we learn anything from the course of Mr. Wernick's remarks in that regard?

KADY O'MALLEY: I think we actually did. He was remarkably candid in both kind of explaining the timeline and what was going on. In general the impression I came away with -- and again we have to hear from Jody Wilson-Raybould frankly to get a sense of the other side of this -- but it's starting to look like this may be a situation where there were interactions on one side, the clerk side. He is absolutely, 100 percent, convinced that there was nothing inappropriate in the interactions he had with the former Attorney General or with SNC-Lavalin or just on this file in general. It does sound like it's the kind of situation where it's very possible the former Attorney General might have a different take on that. And that obviously comes from a frustrating kind of political controversy because no one's right and no one's wrong. It really does come down to sort of where you subjectively stand and where you think that line should be drawn.

CO: A lot of the questions from the opposition toward Mr. Wernick were about what was SNC-Lavalin doing, how much influence did they have over things, all these meetings -- these 50 meetings that keep getting cited. How do he explain the influence or how he attended these meetings with SNC-Lavalin and what he took away from them?

KADY O'MALLEY: He actually drew a really interesting line because he went through all of the communications. So there are you know records of meetings between the clerk and between representatives of SNC-Lavalin -- two or three of those he said that he actually had been contacted [inaudible] to ask for a meeting, but he you know sort of deferred that request. He did take one, and they made the case for him as to why they thought that they should get this deferred prosecution agreement. He kind of listened to them, and that was the end of it. Simply the fact that a company like SNC-Lavalin can run newspaper ads, they can send their lobbyists to Ottawa, they can set up these meetings, they can try their absolute hardest to you know campaign for their interests -- it doesn't always work. And I think that that's perhaps something that you know maybe we should keep in mind when we're looking at this. Ultimately the decision they wanted -- that wasn't the outcome they got.

CO: That's what he kept saying over and over again -- the proof is in the pudding. I mean nothing came of it, right -- they're being prosecuted. But you know just to get what might happen next week: Jody Wilson-Raybould is apparently going to testify. And the whole thing is around, well she's bound by solicitor client privilege, she won't be able to talk, why don't you release her from that. That's what the opposition was asking. But Mr. Wernick said well she can come here, she can answer any questions that she wants to or can -- she can get her own sense of where the lines are, it's entirely up to her. Is that true?

KADY O'MALLEY: She should be able to discuss any of the meetings that she had with the clerk simply because he's already mentioned them and pointed them, so it would be odd if she were to then -- privilege, you wouldn't think would apply in that context. I think it depends on sort of the breadth – the clerk actually [inaudible] give a narrow definition of solicitor client privilege -- by what she meant you know legal advice in a confidential setting like a real lawyer as opposed to an attorney general who is in this weird quasi position of also being a cabinet minister. So yeah I mean the upshot is, I would be very surprised if at any point anything Jody Wilson-Raybould said -- I don't think she's going to walk out the door to find someone about to haul her off on contempt of court charges for violating solicitor client privilege. I don't think we're anywhere near that zone. So the question is going to be what she's comfortable saying.

CO: Just finally -- since this story broke by the Globe and Mail -- the sense is that there's something really large going on here that none of us can quite figure out. You do much better than the rest of us. But the sort of writing now is that the punditry is that while this scandal is huge the Liberals will never recover from this -- this is big. What's your sense of how much damage this might do to the Liberals?

KADY O'MALLEY: Again it is so hard to tell from Ottawa because right now this story is all consuming. There is nothing else happening anywhere as far as we're concerned in the greater precinct. I have no idea if that is actually the case for normal human beings who are existing outside this ambit. It's actually true to say that historically and sort of almost chronically, the Liberal Party has a problem with any suggestion of corruption or cronyism. That's sort of almost baked into the brand. And as soon as those allegations come forward there's always the possibility that voters might go, oh right! And wasn't there a sponsorship scandal and this and that and the other. If you are the Liberals and you're heading onto the campaign trail, that's not the history you want to be defending. So far, it doesn't look as though anything that happened comes close to an actual criminal activity. There is no suggestion that people were shoving money in pockets. So I don't know. I think maybe this just blows itself out in a week or two.

CO: Okay. We'll be watching [Laughter].

KADY O'MALLEY: Of course you can play that back at me if there is a public inquiry six months from now.

CO: I think you're right though about I don't know how much this is playing out in the world where there's a lot more going on than perhaps...

KADY O'MALLEY: I mean it might be huge, it might not -- we have no concept of it here.

CO: Kady thank you.

KADY O'MALLEY: Thank you so much.

ATW: We reached Kady O'Malley in Ottawa.

[Music]

Jussie Smollett case

Guest: Nana Efua Mumford

ATW: Jussie Smollett's story was so shocking, it seemed stranger than fiction. And today, that's what Chicago Police are alleging: that the entire story was fabricated. The U.S. actor and star of the TV series "Empire" has been charged with filing a false police report -- after he claimed he was the victim of a hate crime. Last month, Mr. Smollett says two white men in Chicago hurled racial and homophobic remarks at him, punched him, and put a rope around his neck. But today, Chicago Police accused Mr. Smollett of making the story up, over misgivings about his salary. Here's part of what Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson told reporters today.

SOUNDCLIP

EDDIE JOHNSON: I'm left hanging my head and asking why. Why would anyone, especially an African-American man, use the symbolism of a noose to make false accusations? Bogus police reports do harm to every legitimate victim who's in need of support by police and investigators as well as the citizens of this city. I love the City of Chicago. But this publicity stunt was a scar that Chicago didn't earn and certainly didn't deserve.

ATW: When Nana Efua Mumford first heard Jussie Smollett's story, something about it didn't sit right with her. She works at the Washington Post as executive assistant to the editorial board, and she's from Chicago. We reached her in Washington, D.C.

CO: Nana Efua we just heard the Chicago Police Superintendent today calling this Jussie Smollett story, a scar that Chicago didn't earn and certainly didn't deserve. What's your assessment?

NANA EFUA MUMFORD: I agree with it. I think that the anger and disappointment was very clear in his voice during the entire press conference. If this did come out to be false, I was going to be heartbroken and I am -- I'm shocked, I'm confused, I'm sad. I'm sad for my city of Chicago. We are a very proud city. And I don't think that there's any excuses for any of our faults, but I think that you really did see that disappointment come in not only in the remarks but also just through his voice about the damage that will be done unfortunately.

CO: So three weeks ago when Jussie Smollett -- when we first heard the story it was shocking, wasn't it. And so when you first heard, what were the details about it -- what was it that actually was the most disturbing for you when you first heard this story?

NEM: I think the totality of all of it was certainly the most disturbing part of it because for instance this was 24 hours before the polar vortex hit the Midwest. Chicago public schools were closed that Wednesday and Thursday. This was a serious storm headed towards Chicago. And so the idea that two assailants would be outside at 2:00 in the morning waiting for him as a victim and when identifying him -- if this was a chance encounter -- identifying him from this show, being able to know the story line of Empire and who his character was, having a noose there, having the bleach, shouting these things about MAGA country -- it just seemed a little bit too over the top and too made up. And so that's when I initially started to have just some general doubts, and I expressed them to friends and family of mine just kind of over the course of the past few weeks.

CO: The story itself -- it was just so extraordinary, wasn't it -- that he had this encounter with two men who hurled racist and antigay slurs at him, who knew him from this show -- he's a black gay actor who plays in this show Empire -- and not only did they put this noose around his neck and beat him up -- which are just horrible images in itself -- and then to be shouting these Donald Trump statements about make America great again. All of that as a package was pretty darn disturbing, wasn't it?

NEM: It certainly was. And I certainly don't want to say that -- instances like this -- so that crimes like this do not occur. I think that all too often within the black community, also within the LGBTQ community, sometimes these attacks are very violent and are over the top and are shocking. It's just one of the reasons why I personally took a step back.

CO: What have the Chicago Police said today about what they think happened?

NEM: Allegedly Jussie was disappointed with his salary and had a conversation with two brothers -- one of which who had previously appeared on this show -- and had decided that they would stage this attack close by to his house. He had spoken with these two brothers -- he paid them a cheque of about 3,500 dollars, and told them that they needed to attack him and that he would then report it.

CO: The two men said they had received money -- they came forward to police?

NEM: The police actually reached out to them. They followed -- through their investigation -- they started following a lot of the digital fingerprints, including looking at videos that captured the area of the attack. They were able to look up different ride sharing apps that had been used at that time in order to trace their movements all the way to the airport where they left the country. And that's also where they were able to follow them upon their entry back into the United States.

CO: On this TV show "Empire" Jussie Smollett plays an openly gay singer-songwriter who's at a hip-hop record label. And it is a very popular TV show. So did that give some fuel to the story? Because this story had a lot of fuel, didn't it.

NEM: It certainly did. I certainly think that the celebrity aspect of this was one of the reasons why it was so widely reported and also why you had so many voices of support for him initially. But I think that it's a wild and crazy show. But this seemingly was one instance where it seemed as if it crossed over into the realm of reality.

CO: And as you say is, a lot of attention to it. There was that segment that he did on Good Morning America which was hugely publicized. It created a lot of controversy, didn't it, especially the suggestion that it was Trump supporters who were involved. What are the ultimate consequences of that? This has wider consequences for people who are coming forward with legitimate complaints, right?

NEM: It does. I think that it cannot be ignored or denied that police resources were likely taken from other cases in order to investigate this. And I think that that's unfortunate in that it was seemingly false. You know I think people worry about whether or not any future claims or reports of hate crimes will be believed. I also worry about whether or not people will report them in the first place. There could be a chilling effect as to whether or not, if you do have your own instance or if you were attacked and if it is over the top, whether or not you'd be believed and whether or not you'd actually report it. And then of course, it could be possible that they are less likely to be believed.

CO: All right we'll leave it there. Nana Efua thank you.

NEM: Thank you very much for your time.

ATW: Nana Efua Mumford is the executive assistant to the editorial board at the Washington Post, and is from Chicago. We reached her in Washington,D.C. For more on this story go to our website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Mudlarker

Guest: Martin Bushell

ATW: There is a depressing amount of garbage in the River Thames. But there's treasure in there too. This week, a human skull from the Neolithic era will go on display at the Museum of London. It was found on the banks of the river by mudlarker. Mudlarking is the extremely British name for a proud tradition dating back to the Victorian era. It's done by amateur archaeologists, who scour the banks of the Thames at low tide for historical artifacts. Martin Bushell is one of them. He's the sharp-eyed mudlarker who spotted what turned out to be the oldest skull ever found on the banks of the Thames. We reached him in London.

CO: Martin how long had you been mudlarking when you had your extraordinary discovery?

MARTIN BUSHELL: About a week. Not very long.

CO: And what did you think you had when you first saw it?

MB: Well when I first saw it I thought it was a pot that might be upside down -- like a ceramic pot. There's a lot of pottery that is on Thames for sure. Obviously when I picked it up it looked more like a crab shell -- until you turn it over and put in the correct position and then you can see barrel of the eyes. And then it dawned on me that it is a skull -- the top of the skull.

CO: You weren't, I guess, expecting to find a body part near by the Thames. So what did you do when you discovered this?

MB: Under my terms in my mudlarking license, we have to inform the authorities -- mainly the police, and what we call the Finds Liaison Office. Anything we find of either interest, historically, or all human remains -- they have to be reported to those two bodies.

CO: And what did the police say when they saw your bone fragment?

MB: They were under the same assumption. The first thing he said, have you picked it up? Have you touched it? And were you wearing gloves? My first reaction is, no I wasn't wearing gloves. So I'm like uh-oh -- I have now put DNA or something all over it. So they do took photographs. They then send the photographs away to be analyzed. And then it comes back to say, yes it looks human -- we need to investigate that further.

CO: And police are investigating because this could have been a victim of foul play or somebody died in the river.

MB: Sadly that does happen -- it does go on. The size of the skull, it did look quite small. It looked like it was very childlike. So from that you tend think -- your mind does work overtime and all these thoughts are going through your mind when you do find these things.

CO: How did you come to learn that it is a human -- piece of a human skull -- but that it's from 5,600 years ago?

MB: Well when you hand it to the police, the police obviously have to send it their pathology department which is in Scotland. The pathology department analyze it and then they do radiocarbon dating on the fragment to see if it's a historic skull or whether it's something more current that should be investigated. And then about a month later they come back to me saying they are no longer investigating it because it did come back to date 5,600 years old.

CO: What have you learned since about this person? I mean now you realize what you were holding in your hands -- it was the piece of the forehead of a young man who was living in 3,600 B.C. -- what they call the Neolithic era. What have you learned since about who he might have been -- how he might have lived?

MB: Quite a lot actually. This is one of the good things about mudlarking is that it entices you to investigate the items that you find or discovered on the Thames. Now with this person -- they were around at the same time that the Stonehenge was built. Now this person might have visited Stonehenge you know when it was being built. The London as it exists today, did not exist in any way, shape, or form back then in 3,600 years B.C. So this would just have been open fields, meandering river -- they would have had the mud or wooden built hut, they would have been like a hunter-gatherer type of person. So this person was about 18 years old. He was a male.

CO: And now this human skull, this bone fragment, will be on display at the Museum of London where presumably thousands and thousands of people will come and see it in an area this man whose skull is there could never have imagined. What does that feel like for you that you were the one who found it and it's now going to be shown?

MB: It is very exciting. I'm so pleased that it's something that the museum can put to use.

CO: But do you think that your mudlarking can top that now that your first week was so successful?

MB: Well there are things you know that are still ongoing. There is -- I think I can tell you guys -- there is another partial skull fragment that is being investigated as well at the moment which was found last week. And it was just lying on the Thames. It's just laying there. It's just so fascinating yeah. I don't doubt that there will be items that I'll be finding or someone else will be finding and that will be topping the skull or the age at some point in the future.

CO: Wow. Martin good luck with your mudlarking. Thank you.

MB: Thank you for your time.

CO: Bye bye.

ATW: Martin Bushell found a piece of human skull from the Neolithic era on the banks of the Thames last September. As of this week, it's on display in the Museum of London. He was in London. To see photos of Mr. Bushell's find visit: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Giant Bee

ATW: They found the fugitive -- but the sting operation was a failure. In January, four people went in search of an insect that hadn't been seen since 1981. Wallace's Giant Bee. The female of the species can grow to four centimetres, or 1.5 inches in length. Also she has giant pincers for biting. Oh, and according to Simon Robson of the University of Sydney quote, "This bee could probably sting you quite happily and then sting you again; it wouldn't kill it." And yet Mr. Robson and three colleagues went looking for it anyway on an island in Indonesia. They knew Wallace's Giant Bee was believed to be extinct, but they believed it wasn't. And they were right. The giant bees burrow into termite nests to lay their eggs. And one day in the forest, the four researchers discovered a hole in a termite nest which appeared to be just the right size. When they pointed a flashlight inside, there she was: the long-lost, and just plain long, bee. So it was a success. But Simon Robson has one regrets -- as he told Australia's ABC News quote, "...we were very keen to get stung by it, to see how painful it was." Well congratulations -- and my condolences. I mean, wanting a giant bee to attack you seems odd to me. But I guess not getting stung must kind of sting.

[Music]

Part 2: Dozens are dead in Dhaka, Bangladesh, after fire rips through a densely-populated neighbourhood

Dhaka fire

Guest: Akbar Hossain

ATW: It took firefighters in Dhaka, Bangladesh, 12 hours to gain control of a massive fire last night. At least 78 people are dead. And emergency crews say it's now simply a recovery effort. The fire started in a neighbourhood called Chawkbazar -- a densely populated part of the city with narrow, winding roads, that's also home to several chemical warehouses. And it's not the first time a fire had devastated the neighbourhood. Nine years ago, a fire there killed more than 120 people. Akbar Hossain is a BBC journalist in Dhaka. That's where we reached him.

CO: Akbar just how devastated is this scene where this fire was in Dhaka?

AKBAR HOSSAIN: This is devastating indeed because this is one of the deadliest fires I have ever seen in my life. I myself covered the same kind of incident in 2010 when there was another fire which broke out in the old part of Dhaka -- and 123 people died. And this is exactly the similar kind of situation -- when fire broke out last night at around 10:30 p.m. the fire was so huge people could see it from a few miles away. When I got to the area I saw one four-story-building where the fire originated. And in the ground floor of the building there were some chemical warehouses which helped the fire to spread so fast. And many people were trapped inside and they burnt to death. Some people who were passing by -- crossing that area -- they also fell victim to the fire. The hospital authorities are saying that 35 dead bodies have identified -- and they can't identify the other dead bodies right now because some dead bodies are so decomposed that it will take time for them to identify all the dead bodies -- they have to conduct DNA tests. So you can understand how devastating the fire incident was.

CO: I understand Akbar there was a wedding party nearby that was also engulfed in these flames.

AH: Yes there was a wedding party nearby in a community centre there. Several people died in that community centre as well. But the area where it happened -- the buildings that were standing inches apart and the area was so cramped and the roads are so arrow that even fire service vehicles couldn't get close to the fire incident. There had to use a huge long hose pipe for controlling the fire. And when the fire broke out it actually spread the whole area in less than 30 seconds. So it is such a devastating thing. All people living in that area -- when I was talking to them, many people were telling me that initially they thought it was an earthquake. Huge explosion took place, all the buildings are shaking in that area, and people are fleeing -- just leaving their homes, doors open and everything.

CO: The Minister of Industries in Bangladesh said that the fire was started by the explosion of gas cylinders, and it had nothing to do with all the chemicals in the area. What do you make of that?

AH: I think he's not saying right thing because I have visited the area -- the fire actually originated outside the building and there were some gas cylinders outside. When the one gasoline exploded it immediately affected the building -- warehouses are located. And it caught fire. So the chemical warehouse they are responsible for spreading the fire so fast. And even the local people are saying that.

CO: These chemical warehouses -- the storage of this and perfume factories as well. How much of that is even legally allowed to be in this region?

AH: Legally this is not allowed. But in Bangladesh the scenario is very pathetic because people don't care about law. And the government, they don't care about imposing law. When another fire incident happened in 2010 -- at that time the chemical warehouses were blamed for that fire -- which was true. The Bangladesh Fire Services authority and some other government authorities, they suggested that all chemical warehouses should be relocated to another area. But after eight years, nothing has changed. So as they have failed, now they're trying to cover it up by saying that no -- chemical warehouses are not responsible for that, rather gas cylinders are being blamed.

CO: You say that in this area there was no concern for safety but we also point out that there was this fire in 2010. There have been other fires. There was the collapse of the Rana Plaza which was just so devastating -- 1,100 garment workers died there -- another type of an industrial accident. Does it seem that the government doesn't really care?

AH: The government doesn't care -- and the people don't care as well. You know there were some initiatives from the Americans, the Europeans, to make Bangladesh's garment factories safer. But what about the residential facilities in other areas? Because when buildings are being built here in Dhaka and other parts of the country, the don't think about fire safety. There are some buildings where fire safety is given much importance -- it's near around 5 percent. But 95 percent building in the area, there is no concern for fire safety. The area where the people live in the old part of the town, more than 10 million people are living in that area. So the area is so crammed as I told you. And it is so small and narrow. And it looks like -- people are saying -- they live in a death trap. If anything happens they have nowhere to go -- it's not only fire incident -- if an earthquake happens, almost 100 percent buildings in that area they don't have any emergency exit, they don't have any firefighting system. So safety measures is completely ignored there. Anyone who will go in that area they will understand how dangerously they are living. It is all because many people say that there is overpopulation. Because Bangladesh has got hundred and sixty million population. So it is such a small country and the most densely populated country the world. So it is not an easy job for either the government or for the people to ensure the safety until or unless they have proper planning, proper accommodation, for everyone.

CO: Akbar I know you have been up for many many hours covering this horrible fire and horrible disaster, so we'll let you go. But I appreciate that you'd talk with us tonight. Thank you.

AH: Thank you very much.

ATW: Akbar Hossain is a BBC journalist in Dhaka, Bangladesh. That's where we reached him.

[Music]

Georges St-Pierre

ATW: Growing up in Montreal, he just wanted to be able to stand up to his bullies. Three decades later, he's retiring as perhaps the greatest martial artist of all time. Today Canada's own Georges St-Pierre announced that he's hanging up his Ultimate Fighting Championship gloves. And he's walking away from a 13 fight winning streak. At a press conference, the former two-division champion had some advice for his fans.

SOUNDCLIP

GEORGES ST-PIERRE: I never considered myself like a victim. I think the problem is people -- they consider themselves as a victim. Yes I've been a victim of bullying. It was tough. But it could have been way worse. You know? If you take a world sense standard -- I could have been born in a very poor country with no resources and nothing. I'm born in Canada -- so already now I'm very lucky to be born here, in this part of the world. It's a great place to grow up. Yeah I am a victim of bullying. But the problem is when you're a victim of something, you shouldn't be feeling like a victim. You know? And you should try to be able to face the problem and see how you can overcome it. Martial arts helped me out in a way that it gave me confidence, it helped me to stand straight up, look people in the eye when I shake hands. And just by changing my image, changing my inside -- how I see myself -- to become more confident, I became a different person. And that's how I overcame bullying and I think that's how I face every obstacle in my life. I don't see it as, oh my god it is way too hard. I see everything as a challenge and it gets me excited. And the more the challenge is big and seems undoable -- like I don't know if I can say undoable, if it seems impossible, the more I get excited. That's how I am.

ATW: That was Canadian mixed martial artist Georges St-Pierre at a press conference today in Montreal. Mr. St-Pierre has announced his retirement from competitive fighting with a record of 26 wins and just two losses.

[Music]

Vatican conference

Guest: Marie Collins

ATW: Bishops from around the world gathered in Rome today for an unprecedented three-day meeting on how to address sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. The Archbishop of Manila, Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle is there. Here's part of what he said this morning about the pain experienced by victims of abuse.

SOUNDCLIP

LUIS ANTONIO TAGLE: The wounds of the Risen Christ carried the memory of innocent suffering, but they also carried the memory of our weakness and sinfulness. If we want to be agents of healing, let us not reject any tendency that is part of worldly thinking -- that refuses to see and touch the wounds of others which are Christ's wounds in the wounded people. Those wounded by abuse and the scandal need to be strong in faith in this moment.

ATW: That's Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle, the Archbishop of Manila, speaking at the Vatican this morning. But many are losing faith in the church as an institution because of the ongoing scandal. Marie Collins is a survivor of clerical sexual abuse. Two years ago, she resigned from the Pope's advisory commission on protecting minors. We reached Ms. Collins in Dublin.

CO: Ms. Collins do you think that meaningful change will come out of this conference at the Vatican?

MARIE COLLINS: No. To be honest and to be direct, I don't think so. The Pope has said that this is a [inaudible] as a sort of a teaching event. And I think the whole point is to try and reach the hearts and minds of these bishops and convert them into believing that abuse is something they have to deal with and have to take seriously. Now while that's important, I don't think it'll make any real difference to what is happening on the ground in the way of the handling of abuse -- the handling of perpetrators, the handling of those who cover up. And by that I mean it's not going to bring in concrete change -- it's going to bring in maybe a change of attitude among some of the bishops. But that alone is not what is needed at this stage. At this stage you need something a lot more solid.

CO: You have listed a number of things you think have to happen before. There can be meaningful change. Number one, which I find really astonishing, is just have a definition of what sexual abuse of a minor is. I know that they have in the past -- they've dealt with this as though it's sin and not criminal behaviour. Has that not been resolved? Is there no clear definition within the Catholic Church as to what constitutes abuse?

MC: No. I mean they haven't. That's the problem. I mean you know in their canon law -- their own church law, which is what they follow -- the only thing they have on child abuse is that it is an offense against the Sixth Commandment. Now that can be interpreted in many many ways. And it makes it difficult in canon law trails. Many times perpetrators of abuse get off without a conviction because canon law is not specific enough. They often have a finding of simply inappropriate behaviour -- which is sort of a minor offense -- because of this lack of clarity in the church's own law. They need to define exactly what constitutes abuse.

CO: You mentioned that it's not just those who are doing the abuse -- and you having been a victim of abuse you know that there are those who are actually guilty of the crime. But the biggest issue that the church has not wrestling with, perhaps, is that the enablers -- those who have helped those who have done their abuse move on to other places or to avoid having to face the consequences. Is there no progress in that regard?

MC: There isn't really. I mean the thing about anyone who covers up or protects an abuser, if he does any act after that which is an offense against a child then the person who has protected them is equally responsible for that abuse, and should be held responsible in the same way. The problem with the covering up and turning a blind eye is that there isn't proper accountability. These men are just as guilty as the perpetrators if they're protecting them. And what I would like to see is zero tolerance for them as well as the zero tolerance for the perpetrator. I spoke to the Pope last August here in Dublin and I asked about him accountability -- and he said oh I am holding bishops accountable. And he said he had removed some bishops who had been found to be covering up and protecting abusers. And I said, but the problem is you allowed them to resign and retire and simply walk away. And they haven't had to take responsibility for their actions. It's no deterrent to other bishops because these men are just walking away without a stain on their character. They can say it's through ill health or through age or something that they're retiring. And the problem is -- what the church are doing there -- they are letting these men save face as they would say or saving the church from scandal. And that's what got the church into this position in the first place. And you also have some who still have the attitude that abuse is more of a moral failing and a sin than anything else -- and you know these men should be allowed to repent and forgiven and then go back into their priestly ministry. And I'd love to see all those men in the Vatican with those attitudes attending these three days along with the bishops because they need education. In fact I think more so than some of the bishops.

CO: You were, at one point, you were on the Pope's advisory commission on preventing sexual abuse of minors. You've met with Pope Francis. What impression do you have of his commitment to this? He has said that he wants to see accountability, transparency, he wants changes. Did you have the sense that he is committed to seeing this issue?

MC: Sorry, he does. He said that. He said, I think today, that you know what was needed was concrete action and concrete measures. But you know if you are the person saying these things have to happen and you actually have the power to make them happen and they don't happen -- it takes away from those words. This was a problem I found on the commission. You know we made recommendations to Pope Francis, they were good recommendations for new policies and accountability and safeguarding. He approved them, and I believe he was sincere. He wanted to do the right thing. But he allowed his administration, his bureaucracy, to bury those recommendations and they never happened. The fact that he didn't follow up and make them happen was a great disappointment to me.

CO: All right well be following closely what happens in the next few days in Rome. And I appreciate speaking with you Ms. Collins. Thank you.

MC: Not at all. Thank you.

ATW: Marie Collins is a sexual abuse survivor, and a former member of the Pontifical Commission for Protection of Minors. We reached her in Dublin.

[Music]

Peter Tork

SOUNDCLIP

[Music]

VOICE 1: Hey Peter, did you ever have a crush on anybody?

VOICE 2: Yeah, once.

VOICE 1: So what did you do about it?

VOICE 2: I took her to a cub scout meeting. [Laughter].

VOICE 1: Didn't anyone have a crush on you or nothing?

VOICE 2: I once got some threating Valentine's. [Laughter].

VOICE 1: You told me you use to play, Spin The Bottle.

VOICE 2: Yeah, but I always lost.

ATW: It takes a smart person to play someone so dumb. And Peter Tork was smart. He could play piano, guitar, banjo, and French horn -- among other things. He was also smart enough to audition for a TV show about a fictitious band -- believing it could be a real opportunity. And it was. Peter Tork of The Monkees died today. He was 77 years old. In 1965, he traveled to Los Angeles responding to an ad for a show with quote, "running parts for four insane boys, aged 17 to 21." He had the musical skill -- but the producers were more interested in his comedic skill and his cool hair. The show was a hit. But the songs that aired on the show were a bigger hit. So the pretend band became a real band, with thousands of real fans, who played real concerts. Incidentally, in his downtime, he would fly to Regina where his father taught economics. In a 1967 interview he said quote, "My folks have some great country digs in Saskatchewan, Canada. I like to get up there with my guitar and doodle." By the late '60s though. The Monkees were over. And despite his genuine talent Mr. Tork was scoffed at for being in a fake band. So after a few lost years, he became a high school teacher. Then came a surprise second chance. In 1986 MTV started airing The Monkees again. And its new audience didn't care about "authenticity" -- they just liked the show and the songs. So The Monkees toured again. And again. They made more albums. And Peter Tork was smart enough to embrace the fact that he would always be a Monkee. As he once told The Telegraph newspaper quote, "Nostalgia is a real and true part of the human experience, and I earn a very decent living from it.".

[Music]

Cat Lake First Nation

ATW: Cat Lake First Nation is in crisis. Last month, the remote community in northern Ontario declared a state of emergency. Homes there are full of mould -- and children are covered in rashes. The community, which is only accessible by plane and winter road, called on the government to act. Today, during a meeting with leaders in Thunder Bay, Indigenous Services Minister Seamus O'Regan signed a deal to repair and replace 57 homes in the community, beginning immediately. In a press conference after the meeting, community leaders said they're grateful for the government's assistance. But Cat Lake Deputy Chief Abigail Wesley said more still needs to be done.

SOUNDCLIP

ABIGAIL WESLEY: It is a starting point. I would say like from what we had put out to the media prior and like we're saying that are going to go after more units, because he says 57 units -- and there's 87 moulded homes. And that's why I'm saying we are going after the government for more. This is a starting point. This is not the ending. This is the starting point. We are going to go further. Like if we may have to help evacuate some people in the meantime due to the health hazard they live in -- we may have to do also. That is why I say we may still have to evacuate some people depending on the living lifestyle we have here. Like we're not going to be able to accommodate like what we're getting now, but it is a starting point and we are going to do the crucial. We are going to move people up -- whatever we can do.

ATW: That was Cat Lake Deputy Chief Abigail Wesley speaking at a press conference in Thunder Bay earlier today.

[Music]

Rutger Bregman

ATW: Historians don't tend to go viral. But Dutch historian Rutger Bregman has now done it twice in three weeks. You may have heard the clip we played of him speaking at the Davos summit in January -- where he accused conference goers of avoiding the topic of taxing the rich. Fox News host Tucker Carlson loved Mr. Bregman's speech so much that he invited him on his show. That interview did not end up on the air -- for reasons that will become clear. Turns out Mr. Bregman recorded it himself, on the sly -- and leaked it to "NowThis News." Here's part of that conversation.

SOUNDCLIP

TUCKER CARLSON: [Chuckles] That's one of the great moments. Maybe "the" great moment in Davos history. Rutger Bregman is the author of Utopia for Realists. And he joins us now. Mr. Bregman I can't stop laughing just listening to that. And part of that makes me wonder, are you the first person ever to note that people are flying private to talk about global warming and none of them mentioned tax avoidance. Has anyone ever said that before at Davos that you know of?

RUTGER BREGMAN: Oh I'm not sure. I'm not an expert on Davos history, but it is a bit hypocritical, isn't it.

TUCKER CARLSON: [Laughs] Yes it is! And others have noted that. We have noted it on this show -- we have just never gone Davos and said it out loud as you did. So if I was wearing a hat I would take it off to you. What response did you get?

RUTGER BREGMAN: I mean they were not very happy with me. But I think a random Dutch historian who's basically saying what everyone around the globe is thinking, you know. The vast majority of Americans for years and years now -- according to the polls, including Fox News viewers and including Republicans -- are in favour of higher taxes on the rich. You know higher inheritance taxes, higher marginal tax rates, higher wealth taxes. It is all really mainstream. But no one's saying that at Davos. Just as no one's saying it on Fox News. Right? And I think the explanation for that is quite simple -- is that most of the people in Davos, but also here on this channel, have been bought by the billionaire [inaudible]. You know you're not meant to say these things. So I just went there and I thought you know what, I'm just going to say it -- just as I'm saying it right here on this channel.

TUCKER CARLSON: Well what was interesting I thought about what you said was you noted something -- I mean many people have called for higher taxes.

RUTGER BREGMAN: Well not on this channel, is it. I mean almost all of the pundits on this channel for years have been against higher taxes. Right? Even though the vast majority of Americans is in favour of it.

TUCKER CARLSON: I mean -- I don't know. It would be interesting to know how many hours of Fox you've watched. But I'm interested in what you said about tax avoidance. Just because someone faces a specific tax rate, does not mean that person pays that tax rate. I don't think -- Netflix for example -- payed any taxes last year -- at all. So what would you do specifically to make certain that this class of people pays what they're supposed to pay?

RUTGER BREGMAN: Well it's about multiple things. So we should really crack down on tax paradises and on tax avoidance -- that's a major issue. But it's also about having higher taxes. But the thing is, I mean you guys have brought into power a president that doesn't even want to show his own tax returns. I mean who knows how many billions he has hidden in the Cayman Islands or in Bermuda. So I think the issue really is one of corruption and of people being bribed and you know not talking about the real issues. You know what the Murdochs basically want you to do is to scapegoat immigrants instead of talking about tax avoidance. So I'm glad you're now finally raising the issue. But that's what's been happening for the past couple of years.

TUCKER CARLSON: Uh-huh. And I'm taking orders from the Murdochs -- is that what you're saying?

RUTGER BREGMAN: Well I mean it doesn't work that directly. But I mean you've been part of the Cato Institute, right? You've been a senior fellow there for years. You've been taking their dirty money. They're funded by the Koch billionaires.

TUCKER CARLSON: Why don't you tell me how it does work?

RUTGER BREGMAN: Well it works by you taking their dirty money. It is just as easy as that. I mean you are a millionaire funded by billionaires. That's what you are. And I'm glad you now finally jumped the bandwagon you know of people like Bernie Sanders and AOC. But you're not part of the solution Mr. Carlson. You're part of the problem actually.

TUCKER CARLSON: AOC -- but can I just say...

RUTGER BREGMAN: It's true, right? It's true, right? That all the anchors on Fox they are all millionaires. How is this possible? Well it's very easy. You're just not talking about certain things.

TUCKER CARLSON: It doesn't even -- Fox doesn't even play where you are.

RUTGER BREGMAN: It doesn't play where you are? Well have you heard of the Internet. I can watch things whatever I want.

TUCKER CARLSON: You have never seen Fox before.

RUTGER BREGMAN: I have actually. I can't say I'm a great fan of your show, but I do my homework when you invite me on your show. So I mean you're probably not going to air this. But I went to Davos to speak truth to power, and I'm doing exactly the same thing right now. You might not like it, but your millionaire funded by billionaires and that's the reason why you're not talking about these issues.

TUCKER CARLSON: But I am talking about these issues.

RUTGER BREGMAN: Yeah only now. Come on you jumped the bandwagon. You're all like, oh I'm against the globalist elite blah blah blah. It's not very convincing to be honest.

TUCKER CARLSON: Why don't you go f--[censor bleep] -- you tiny brained...And I hope this gets picked up -- because you are a moron. I tried to give you a hearing but you were too [censor bleep] annoying...

RUTGER BREGMAN: You can't handle the criticism, can you?

ATW: That was Dutch historian Rutger Bregman speaking with Fox News host Tucker Carlson, on a segment the channel decided not to air. After NowThis published Mr. Bregman's recording of the conversation. Mr. Carlson posted an explanation. Here's part of what he said.

SOUNDCLIP

TUCKER CARLSON: I called him a moron and then I modified that word with a vulgar Anglo-Saxon term that is also intelligible in Dutch. In my defense I would say that that was entirely accurate. But you're not allowed to use that word on television. So once I'd said it out loud there was no airing the segment. As it turns out Bregman taped our exchange. And if you like, you can listen to it. There is some profanity, and I apologize for that. On the other hand it was genuinely heartfelt. I meant it with total sincerity.

ATW: That was Fox News host Tucker Carlson speaking about an unaired interview which his guest historian Rutger Bregman leaked to the media.

[Music]

Part 3: MEP arrested at airbase fears Europe will be the 'playground of a new nuclear arms race'

Green M.E.P. arrest

Guest: Thomas Waitz

ATW: They don't want American nukes on European soil. So they protested -- and ended up in handcuffs. Yesterday, police detained four Green Members of European Parliament at a Belgian military airbase that houses nuclear bombs. The arrests come as the rhetoric between Washington and Moscow heats up. Both have suspended their compliance with the nuclear treaty forged by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev at the end of the Cold War. And yesterday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said, that if the West deploys new missiles in Europe, his country will develop new weapons and aim them at Western centres. Thomas Waitz is one of the Green Members of the European Parliament who was arrested. We reached him in Brussels.

CO: Mr. Waitz what happened after the police arrested you?

THOMAS WAITZ: I was arrested -- I was taken into the military base which was quite surprising. But after I guess half an hour, they were taking us to a police station close by to Leopoldsburg.

CO: And your three colleagues, they were detained -- they broke into the base. Are they facing charges?

TW: They don't know yet. But we expect charges. I will not face the charge because I did not break into the base.

CO: What might they be charged with? Do you have any idea?

TW: Well that's a good question. It could be a sentence up to five years in jail. But as they are without any criminal record, that would not end up in a real jail sentence. But they could also be charged on a financial basis. But we don't know -- because actually they're looking forward to get a trial, because in this trial there could be a chance to clarify if and how many nuclear bombs are stored on that base. I mean we know that there are some -- the Belgian government neither deny nor confirm the information.

CO: So for you this protest can become an opportunity to get stage, a public opening, in order to bring attention to what's going on?

TW: Yes exactly. We started this activity and this action because we were alerted through the INF treaty that has been well left abolished however by U.S. administration -- Trump administration. And our worries are getting confirmed by the speech to the union of Mr. Putin, president of Russia, where he yesterday clearly stated that well Russia is preparing for a new arms race and sending messages like well U.S. should take note of Russia's weapons before making any move. We're fearing a new nuclear arms race here on European soil. And I think we should do whatever we can to keep Europe out of that -- from my perspective -- really unreliable and stupid game.

CO: Including possibly facing time in prison?

TW: Well I think it's a very crucial issue. I mean to have nuclear bombs on Belgium and European soil -- and having a Russian president clearly announcing that he's ready to point missiles on every place known where U.S. nukes are stored. I think this is such a security threat for millions of people here in the centre of Europe that it's even worth being arrested for some hours or facing a charge.

CO: This military base where your three colleagues from the Green Party, where they broke in order to make this protest, what exactly is stockpiled there? What are the bombs that are being held at that air base?

TW: Now this is Kleine Brogel -- it is a Belgium air base close to the Netherlands. There are nukes there from the '80s actually. They were stored there [in] '84 and we don't know exactly how many there are. All the information that we have shown us it must be around 20 nuclear bombs. But it's a gravity bomb so it's not missiles pointing on something but it's like old style nukes that have to be dropped by an airplane. There's also F-16 there that can be equipped with the nukes any time.

CO: And since Washington and Donald Trump have announced that they will no longer observe the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty -- this extraordinary historical document signed and forged by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev. Now that they're not going to observe that anymore, what concerns do you have as to what other weapons might be stored at that base and others in Europe?

TW: Well our concern is that Europe is going to be used as the playground for this stupidness -- as well on the European and NATO state side as well as on the European states which are closer to Russia like Belorussia but also Russia themself. And also in Kaliningrad. We fear that both sides will put some intermediate range missiles on European soil. And I think what we have to state is that Europe has its own security policy, Europe has its own security interests, and it's for sure not of our European interest to be the playground of a new nuclear arms race. I mean I grew up in Cold War. I'm Austrian. I was living in a country that was partly surrounded by East Bloc. We were not completely part of the West Bloc, but also not part of East Bloc. I grew up along metal fences, zones where people were shot that tried to leave. So I grew up in an environment of Cold War where it was clear that any day an accident or a modern accident or an attack on purpose could happen to have devastating effect on myself, on my family, on my friends, on my city. And I think we should never return to that old school backwards kind of politics.

CO: But you know there have been, since the end of the Cold War, there have been threats, and escalation, sabre rattling. And then things settle down again. What is it about this moment in history that looks so much more serious from your point of view?

TW: What looks very serious from my point of view -- I mean you know the authoritarian style of Russia is well known and I don't have a lot of trust into this government. But up to now in the last 20, 30, even 40 years our partners -- the U.S. were partnering also in trying to reduce nuclear weapons and to also find ways to communicate with each other and to try to defend the peace rather than make war games. But now we have the Trump administration where you can't say one day and what's going to happen next day. And he clearly says well it's about America first and we don't care about all the others. So I doubt whether this is still a partner for us. But as Trump is not going to stay forever, we still have hope to be able to repair our relationship to U.S. But in the moment this is for sure not a reliable partner for us.

CO: Mr. Waitz I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

TW: Thanks for being interested.

CO: Good night.

TW: Good night.

ATW: Thomas Waitz is an Austrian MEP. He was in Brussels. And you can find more on this story on our website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Zion Williamson

ATW: Last night the two biggest rivals in college basketball -- Duke and North Carolina --went head-to-head. And with Duke's star player Zion Williamson wearing Nike kicks, the company probably thought it was a shoe-in for good publicity. But just after tip off, disaster struck -- for Mr. Williamson, for Duke fans, and for Nike.

SOUNDCLIP

ANNOUNCER 1: Usually that's the North Carolina Tar Heels.

ANNOUNCER 2: Slipping and injured is Zion Williamson. Back the other way, a lay up for Cam Johnson. And 36 seconds into the game Zion Williamson is down.

ANNOUNCER 1: He blew through his shoe. Look at his left shoe -- he blew completely threw the shoe.

ANNOUNCER 2: Zion Williamson as you can see, heading to the locker room right now for the Blue Devils. Blown shoe and an injured right knee. Never seen anything like it.

ANNOUNCER 1: Hard with the left. Foot gives out. Foot goes through the sneaker. The sneaker didn't come off. He went through the sneaker. And he grabs his right knee. This is 33 seconds in. President Obama -- you can see what he said he saw what you saw. He was closer to the action. And Williamson's night was over.

ATW: Reactions to Duke University basketball player Zion Williamson's injury. Mr. Williamson suffered a sprained knee when his Nike shoe fell apart on the court. The company has released the following statement quote, "We are obviously concerned and want to wish Zion a speedy recovery. The quality and performance of our products are of utmost importance. While this is an isolated occurrence, we are working to identify the issue.".

[Music]

Rodent extinction

Guest: John Woinarski

ATW: It looked fairly unremarkable -- a small, brown, mousey rodent with round black eyes. But the Bramble Cay melomys now holds the terrible distinction of being the first mammal believed to have been snuffed out by human-induced climate change. Earlier this week, the Australian government announced that the rodent is officially extinct. To John Woinarski, this tragedy was entirely preventable. He tried to warn the government about it a decade ago. He's a conservation biologist with Charles Darwin University and the Threatened Species Recovery Hub. We reached him in Melbourne.

CO: John we know that a lot of species go extinct -- we've seen this going on. But why should we care more about this little rodent -- the Bramble Cay melomys?

JOHN WOINARSKI: Well there's a reasonable explanation for this extinction, and that it was probably one of the first mammal species in the world to be driven extinct because of climate change. The species lived in a really small island, only about three to five hectares in size. It was a really low lying island, only about 3 metres high. And it was eventually swamped by tidal inundation. The tidal inundation was a result of slowly rising sea levels in that part of the world in which it lived. But also storm events that probably are triggered in part by climate change. So it's probably a forerunner of many more extinctions to come because of climate change.

CO: And this is why the alarm bell has gone off, hasn't it, that others have expected or anticipated including you -- you actually raised the alarm about this little brown creature quite some time ago. Tell us what you tried to tell the Australian government about its significance.

JW: Yeah another really disappointing part of this extinction is that it was entirely predictable and preventable. So it would have been easy to go to this island to collect some individuals to start an insurance captive breeding population and then to move some individuals from that population into other islands. Then there were many other islands nearby, many of which are more robust than this particular island. So it would have been easy to prevent this extinction. But there was no funding provided by the Australian government. The plan that was written to try to save it by the Australian government didn't include captive breeding -- the most obvious thing to do. So it failed. It became extinct not entirely of its own volition but because we didn't do enough to save it.

CO: And is there a different reaction now, now that the headlines around the world is that Australia has seen the first mammal to go extinct because of human induced climate change?

JW: Yeah it certainly has got much more publicity now that it's dead than when it lived. And it's really useful. I think it's extinction might not be in vain if we learn lessons from this particular case. The other important component of this extinction is that it was a nondescript, uncharismatic, species living in a remote area where very few people ever went. Much of the public awareness of biodiversity loss is to pandas and koalas and tigers, but it's the less well known things which are really most at risk often.

CO: There's an interesting quote by Tim Beshara who's the federal policy director of your Wilderness Society. And he said that the Bramble Cay melomys was a little brown rat but it was our little brown rat -- and it was our responsibility to make sure it persisted, and we failed. Is that a sensibility that is shared by many Australians now?

JW: I think certainly. Our natural environment has a really distinctive part -- one of the most important qualities of our environment in Australia. It's partly how we define ourselves as a country. No one else is going to save this rat other than the Australian government and the Queensland government in this case. So they had a responsibility, and it is a responsibility that they failed to uphold.

CO: What you describe is how they could have saved it. How simple might that have been? Was there any effort made when you set the alarm to try and save the species?

JW: A very desultory effort. There were occasional visits to the island by researchers and government scientists who were more interested in the turtles which were living there -- which you know it is an important attribute itself, but nothing substantial was done to save the species by any government agency or researchers. So its extinction is as much neglect as through any other reason. But importantly Australia has lost a really large number of its native mammal species -- more than any other country in the world. This is the 34th Australian mammal species that has become extinct since European settlement of Australia about 200 years ago. Much of our mammal [inaudible] Australia has been eroded through a whole range of threats but particularly through lack of care, and lack of resourcing, and lack of commitment by governments and others.

CO: Have you raised the same alarm about other animals that are destined to go extinct because of climate change?

JW: Yeah there's certainly -- for example in Australia the vulnerable spectacled flying fox lost a third of its population -- about 30,000 individuals over two days because of heat stress. In Queensland temperatures so high that the bats simply fell out of the trees dead. There are many other species in Australia which are highly imperiled due to climate change. And it is not only rising temperatures, it is rising sea level, it is increase fire severity and intensity and extent -- increased in drought. A whole range of factors are being played out through the various manifestations of climate change and all of those factors are affecting much of the stray biodiversity and will affect much of the world's biodiversity. That's not something that will happen in our children's future alone, it's happening now.

CO: And any change to policy? Are you seeing any awareness that's leading to new laws, new understandings, new approaches?

JW: It would be wonderful to think that this regrettable extinction would have that consequence, but it hasn't yet.

CO: And yourself -- as someone who has been trying to sound the alarm -- how do you feel about that? What do people in your profession feel they can do at this point about that lack of interest?

CO: Yeah it can make one very despondent because you know I'm a zoologist I love and care for wildlife. And the loss of any wildlife species is a terrible blow to my soul and sort of the way I see the world. But we have to also recognise that there are some startling success stories of species that through goodwill, through commitment, through resourcing, through evidence, have been brought back from the brink of extinction. We must celebrate those cases and learn from those as well as our regretting the failures. Some successes are just as important as the failures.

CO: John I appreciate speaking with you. Thanks.

JW: It was great. Thank you very much Carol.

ATW: John Woinarski is a conservation biologist with Charles Darwin University and the Threatened Species Recovery Hub. We reached him in Melbourne, Australia.

[Music]

Allan MacDougall

ATW: He made it big with a gamble on a little-known series of books about a kid named Harry Potter. Allan MacDougall, the co-founder of Raincoast Books, died on Tuesday in Vancouver. He was 71. Mr. MacDougall travelled the world before deciding to get into book distribution. And eventually, Raincoat Books became the largest book distributor in the country. But first, they had a shot at landing the Canadian rights to J.K. Rowling's books about that young wizard. In June of 2003, Mr. MacDougall spoke with CBC Montreal's "Daybreak" about how a bit of luck got him that deal. Here's part of that conversation.

SOUNDCLIP

ALLAN MACDOUGALL: Yeah I think it's sort of great -- it's great luck and good fortune. We are the Canadian distributor for a number of publishers British, American, Canadian. One of them is Bloomsbury. And they are the original publisher of J.K. Rowling. And they signed J.K. Rowling in I think it was about 1996 and 1997. And we were doing their distribution then, and we were over visiting when the manuscript was circulating in the office and everybody was saying, oh my gosh this book is so great -- everybody is we going to love it. But sorry we don't have Canadian rights. So they thought they had sold rights to the U.S. and we we accepted that and went along our merry way. But about '98 when they published in the U.K. but had not yet published in the States, I was at the Frankfurt Book Fair and wandered by one of the booths where -- it no relationship to Bloomsbury or kids books or anything -- and I just ran into the editor who had signed the book for Bloomsbury. And it was the first time I'd seen them in a couple of years and I said thanks pal -- you know because at that time it was a fairly big book in the U.K. And I said thanks for getting us rights. And he said oh well you know, we just didn't pay enough attention. We talked for quite a while. And then finally said to me, you know I've got a funny feeling -- why don't you go and talk to Nigel Newton who's the managing director of Bloomsbury. And I just got him to check the contract.

VOICE: And that's why you got it?

ALLAN MACDOUGALL: He called London. Checked the contract. He said, oh my God! If we act now I think we can get the rights. We made a bid as a joint venture, and we got it.

ATW: That with Canadian book distributor Allan MacDougall speaking on CBC Montreal's "Daybreak" in 2003. Mr. MacDougall died on Tuesday. He was 71.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

February 21, 2019 Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This