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 Current Transcript for March 20, 2019

Host: Anna Maria Tremonti

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

Congressmen, we do not allow groups on Facebook overall. If there is a group that their primary purpose or a large part of what they do is spreading hate, we will ban them from the platform overall.

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: Those words from Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg sound devastatingly hollow now after the killer who targeted Muslim worshippers in New Zealand streamed live on Facebook. By the time Facebook removed the video it had been viewed 4000 times and was showing up across the Internet on other platforms. The proliferation of violence and shared hate online, from white supremacist and far right extremist groups, is now so pervasive that those who track it say it's spilling into the mainstream and influencing a wider audience. Now I am looking at the cause for Canada to do more to stop it. Also today:

SOUNDCLIP

When you get it up in the morning, get cleaned up and get dressed and get more mobile, you are more apt to heal faster, it just feels good to be dressed.

AMT: That Alberta are hospital patients' delight in ditching the ghastly open backed gown in favor of her own clothes is backed up by research that shows patients who get pristine get moving have faster recovery times. We're looking at the push to End PJ Paralysis in half an hour. But we're starting with the furer on Parliament Hill as the government and the opposition try to control the narrative on budget day.

SOUNDCLIP

The conservatives are desperate to talk about anything other than the federal budget. They don't want to talk about Canadian economy and the reason is, we have created growth and benefit.

AMT: I'm Anna Maria Tremonti this is The Current.

Back To Top »

Conservatives heckling during budget didn't do Andrew Scheer 'any favours': strategist

Guests: Angela Wright, Kathleen Monk, John Duffy

SOUNDCLIP

[Noise]

AMT: Liberals were hoping to use yesterday's federal budget to turn the page on a difficult few weeks it did not go according to plan. For most of Finance Minister Bill Morneau speech in the House of Commons no one could actually hear him. Heckling from the conservative opposition benches was so loud it drowned him out almost completely, forcing the speaker of the House to cut off everyone's microphones his included. The conservatives were voicing their frustration after Liberal MPs on the Justice Committee voted to shut down their investigation into the SNC Lavalin affair. In the foyer of the House of Commons Conservative leader Andrew Scheer accused the Liberals of a cover up.

SOUNDCLIP

This budget is not a serious fiscal plan for the country. It is a 41 billion dollar corruption cover up that Canadians will pay for, if he is re-elected. His desperate attempts at a cover up are themselves part of this corruption. His Justice investigations shut down as abuse of power, an affront to democracy and an attack on parliament.

AMT: The focus on SNC Lavallette was a potent diversion on a day the government had hoped would be dominated by what was in their budget, 22.8 Billion dollars in new spending over the next five years with a focus on Indigenous services, first time homebuyers and the economy, with the October election on the horizon the stakes for all parties could not be higher. For their view on the latest drama from Parliament Hill and how it may affect voters, I'm joined by three political strategists: John Duffy is the founder of StrategyCorp. He's a former Liberal strategist and adviser to former Prime Minister Paul Martin. He is also the author of Fight of Our Lives: Elections Leadership and the Making of Canada. Angela Wright is a freelance political writer and conservative strategist. They are both with me in our Toronto studio. And in Ottawa we're joined by Kathleen Monk. She is a principal at Earnscliffe Strategy Group. She's a former NDP strategist for the late Jack Layton. And hello everyone.

JOHN DUFFY: Good morning.

ANGELA WRIGHT: Good morning.

KATHLEEN MONK: Hello.

AMT: Well what I would call a group of strategists? Do I call you a gaggle, a Parliament of strategists? Angela Wright I'm going to start with you and I want to start with the unusual way in which Mr. Moreno delivered his speech under objection and loud heckling from the opposition Conservatives. What do you think of those tactics?

ANGELA WRIGHT: It's interesting. I certainly understand where their frustration comes from given that the way that justice can be completely just shelved the investigation into SNC Lavalin. It's understandable why they wouldn't want the former attorney general to come back and speak again, but to completely just blindside them and say that they want to move on to a new study on the same days the budget it strikes as a very odd strategy from the government, and why they would want to do that. I mean I think that of course the government wants to talk about the budget but they have to know that they're conservatives still want to talk about SNC Lavalin. And so it just strikes me as a very strange move from the liberal community. The issue with Heckerling of course I agree that they should voice their frustration but of course the budget is still extremely important. If the government wants to deliver the budget then Canadians should at least be able to hear what the finance minister has to say. And then they can come out in and after he makes a speech then they can come in and continue to remind Canadians about SNC Lavalin and the fact that they're not going to let the issue go away.

AMT: John Duffy How successful was Andrew Scheer at stealing Finance Minister Morneau's thunder?

JOHN DUFFY: I'm not really sure that was what was going on to be honest with you. I think the temper, the tantrum that the legislative tantrum at the opposition's staged yesterday- I dont think it was an authentic representation of outrage. I think it was cranked up. I think it was a deliberate attempt to make sure that the conversation would be about whether the governments succeeded in getting the budget conversation going or not. I think frankly Liberals were pretty realistic about what the opposition was likely to do yesterday. We expect that .what we didn't expect was the spectacle, the pounding, the stamping, the hooting and hollering. Like I said really looking like a tantrum from a day care center. And I don’t think you sure did himself any favors in that. Part of the opposition's job was to oppose of course but the other job was to present themselves as a government in waiting. That was not a government in waiting. And at the end of the day the election day will not be about who's having a conversation, it will be about a very clear choice between two teams and two leaders. I don't think Mr. Scheer did himself any favors in that category yesterday.

AMT: Kathleen Monk.

KATHLEEN MONK: Yes I have to agree that it was a legislative tantrum. Listen I have lived in this town of Ottawa for close to 20 years and you’re not going to find a person who likes the kind of stunts and antics in the house more than me for them with great passion. But yesterday was disappointing for a couple reasons. I think that tactics that the Conservative Party did in the House actually serves to erode the parliamentary institution. And while it was in some ways they were successful because on the morning clips this morning you heard lots of that pounding, you heard lot's of that stamping. They got their clips. I don’t think it will age well for Mr. Scheer. I don’t think he served his party well. John just mentioned how the role of the opposition parties is to oppose it but it also is to propose. We didn't see really strong ideas coming out of the conservatives. Conversely I would argue that the Democrats were more balanced in their approach to the tactics. The SNC Lavalin an affair shouldn't be dismissed. They should keep, opposition parties, should keep the heat on the Trudeau government to get to the bottom of the truth and that likely means having Jody Wilson-Raybould speak again. But you don't need to do it in a way that the Conservatives did yesterday.

AMT: Okay so let's get to the meat of the matter, let's talk about the budget. John Duffy what were the liberals hoping to achieve with this and did they pull it up?

JOHN DUFFY: Well I think the liberal objective is to translate the reality of four years of economic strength which has produced record low unemployment that we haven't seen for 40 years, and all kinds of good prosperity for all kinds of people. To translate that into addressing the insecurities of people who are precariously in the middle class or fighting like heck to try to join it. That's really the core underlying feeling about the course of the country is that a lot of people are feeling things are going okay, but a whole lot of people, particularly people who are inclined to think about voting Liberal, feel that they're threatened. And so the purpose of the budget was to tell those people in very concrete terms that the government of Canada, the Trudeau Liberal government is behind them with concrete measures like the housing start program, like the training program, like Pharmacare.

AMT: Did it work?

JOHN DUFFY: Well I think so. I think the measures speak for themselves. Did it get over the noise of the opposition? I don't know, we're here talking. Will it reassure people? I think it will , if they understand it, if they hear about it.

AMT: Angela do you think it worked?

ANGELA WRIGHT: I think it depends on who you're talking about. In terms of the investments for Indigenous communities, that's very important and we'll have to wait and see how they respond to that. In terms of some of the proposals for young people, the student loans, having their six month interest free grace period of course is important. Also reducing interest rates also very important. Now we know that student debt is an issue of concern for a lot of young people. But in terms of the housing, the housing programs you've got the housing incentive. That's not really relevant especially for young people living in Toronto. I mean you have up to about 480 thousand dollars of housing price and then when you think about the average housing price in Toronto is over 700-800 hundred dollars and it's not really relevant. Then they also have the other program which is you can use up to 35,000 dollars from an RSP. And then the question is how many young people have that much money in an RRSP that they can then translate into a new house and that's only 10,000 thousand more than what was already available, I mean that 10,000. It's a little bit of a difference but for young people it seems kind of like - especially young people really unaffordable cities like Toronto and Vancouver - it seems like we've kind of been lost in between those two programs. Either you have to have up to 120,000 dollars. Income but then also be buying your house that's less than 480,000. Or you have to have more money but then it can only use 35,000 dollars on a more expensive home. So that that particular initiative, I'm not sure how that will actually benefit young people although in terms of the interest rates and the student loans that is very good.

AMT: Of course millennial are a demographic that everyone's looking at. Kathleen Monk, what do you think the big headline is of the budget?

KATHLEEN MONK: That this is an election budget. Remember this is the fourth budget that Morneau has delivered. It's the end of their mandate. So a couple significant things the liberals are trying to do with this budget. They were moving away from past themes in the budget like infrastructure or innovation and science agenda. And they're moving really to address some of those middle class anxieties and setting out basically a platter of election promises and policies to kind of target different demographics that they need to reach in the next election. I think the most significant thing - and we'll see in the coming days as we go through more the tables and the budget the background - But the most significant thing is they spend a lot of money and they spend it on social policy, and what that does interestingly is that it sets up basically the fiscal envelope for the other parties. The other opposition parties who will have to use this budget and the economics that the liberals have set out as the foundation of their platforms as they develop their election promises for the election that will happen in October.

AMT: Does that mean they're trying to control the narrative of the other parties?

KATHLEEN MONK: For sure they're trying to basically wedge both parties. So the conservatives will either have to cut programs that they don't want as large deficit spending. They are trying to edge in to New Democrats social policy areas--.

AMT: Jagmeet Singh was talking about housing relief, right?

KATHLEEN MONK: Yes but the problem with what the Liberals have done in terms of their housing really is largely targeted at millennial that Angel has described is that it actually doesn't create new housing stock. It doesn't create new affordable housing units that we know Canadians need. It doesn't come close to the target of the half million affordable units that are required in the next 10 years. So while certainly if you happen to be a millennial, so you're someone who's under thirty seven and you happen to have 35,0000 dollars in RESPs, yes, now you can spend that towards your first home but it actually doesn't make the homes themselves more affordable. And that's the challenge that many people are facing and not just millennial but also you know in some of our largest cities across Canada.

AMT: John Duffy you are frowning but strategically maybe respond to what she's saying.

JOHN DUFFY: I mean I'm comforted by the comfort of familiarity and hearing my good friend from the NDP talk about how there should be more and better and some tinkering and a bit more better and I don’t think there's anything wrong with that. I am more intrigued by what Angela's suggesting which is when she's saying there should be more. There's not enough here. That's not really Andrew Scheer it coming from, that goes to the strategic thrust of this budget. The budget is intended to set up a very direct policy contrast between the Liberals and the Conservatives. The Liberals have decided very clearly that the Conservatives are who they're going after in this election. They tend to have an argument with the conservatives about what the priority should be: balancing the books, deficit control, cutting the debt - which is what the concerns will line up for. They always do - or spending money or on programs which is what Liberals like to do. That is a ballot box question in the making which direction you want to go? If the Liberals can make that something that people are thinking about in the election, then they'll have a Conservatives in a pretty difficult position, because it's that the Conservatives can credibly offer a different way of doing politics. This is a party of Stephen Harper and [unintelligible]. What the Conservatives have to offer is just change for changes sake. If they are saddled with an unpopular policy proposition like slashing programs, taking these things away from people in order to worship at the altar of balanced budgets, they're going to find themselves on the wrong end of the electoral equation. That's the strategic game I think.

AMT: So you're saying they're setting them up.

JOHN DUFFY: I don't know about setting them up. That's a little diabolical.

AMT: Oh we wouldn't want to be diabolical.

JOHN DUFFY: [Cross talking] But here's the thing it does set up a legitimate question that voters have to ask, which way do you want to go? Cutting the deficit with the Conservatives or keeping these programs going with the Liberals for the middle class.

AMT: I want Angela Wright to jump in here.

ANGELA WRIGHT: I think that, what John is saying - makes a lot of sense. We saw the exact same thing going on in Ontario. Right now the Ontario Liberals before the before the last election came up with this huge budget and all these spending and then when the Conservatives came in they had to get the debt under control, mostly because creditors are saying hey you actually need to return to balanced budgets or else we're going to lower your credit rating which is exactly what happened. And so of course the country, the national finances are not as dire as they are in Ontario until the risk of having a downgraded credit rating is not the same. And I think it makes a lot of sense of course that the liberals like to turn conservatives into the bad guys into the evil people who are always just come in and cut programs in that's their way of creating this narrative, that conservatives don't care about people. But conservatives also understand that we need to at least have some sort of fiscally minded program like we can't continue to just rack up debt because at the end of the day that debt has to be repaid. And right now we're in a low interest rate era and so things are pretty good. Well yes Bill Morneau has noted it has noted that the debt to GDP ratio is going down which is great. But at the same time, because interest rates are so low, once they go up at some point we don't know when that's going to be, they'll make our debt more expensive.

AMT: So let me ask you about another issue. Conservative leader Andrew Scheer is facing criticism of his own in the past week for his response to the New Zealand mosque attack, for not calling Islamophobia and naming it and actually acknowledging that Muslims at prayer were the people killed. How does that play in to electoral politics?

ANGELA WRIGHT: I suspect it'll certainly come up. That's a serious problem for the Conservatives mostly because that is where a lot of people remember - not Islamophobia specifically - but from the last election especially with the barbaric cultural practices tip line that came out right before the last election. So it sets up a narrative for the Liberals to create that 'look the conservatives are just as racist as they were in the last election. They still hate Muslims like they did in the last election'. And so I think it's a serious problem, especially when you consider the way that the conservatives went after Iqra Khalid when she proposed the motion against the steady Islamophobia and systemic racism. The answer is right now really need to be careful about how they present themselves to Canadians. And because Canadians now are a lot more in tune with issues of hate crimes and white nationalism and all these things. And now that they see how dangerous and how violent these people actually are, they want politicians to be kind of toying with people who might espouse these issues or are just not even able to acknowledge that it exists and acknowledge it as a problem.

AMT: Kathleen Monk we received a bit of this also played provincially with the newly called Alberta elections, sort of economy vs. the language around hate.

KATHLEEN MONK: Yes. And do we stand particularly in Alberta, there seem to be scanned one province [unintelligible] many separate provinces. And I think the challenge the White Nationalism has reared its head as well in Alberta in terms of a number of Jason Kenney's you know the conservative party's candidates. Very dangerous also on the federal level in terms of Andrew Scheer's party and some of the associations with different media groups that promote basically racism. So I think that that is something that the electoral spotlight is going to be on. And leaders who want till lead will need to be clear in their denunciation and not associate themselves or for that matter that candidates that have those beliefs. Well Jason Kenney yesterday in his launch very much tried to say that they had a very diverse lead in Alberta in the conservative party. What we've seen in terms of the comments, the anti-LGBTQ comments, the pro-White Nationalism comments of that party are very scary.

AMT: So let's bring it back to the feds. Is it going to be about the economy? Is it going to be about other issues? Can you tell what's going to dominate? I'll just go round the table real fast because we're almost out of time.

JOHN DUFFY: It's early days. The economy always matters. Absolutely. In the end it will come down to leadership. The prime minister and the finance minister showed leadership governing for middle class Canadians yesterday. The opposition showed something really different.

AMT: Okay. Liberal strategic view. Conservative strategic view.

ANGELA WRIGHT: Of course just like John said the economy always matters. These whispers about whether or not we're moving towards a recession if we do end up in a recession that will make the economy even more important, but also the underlying social issues will certainly be important as well.

ANGELA WRIGHT: Kathleen Monk. Last word.

KATHLEEN MONK: I think that's where government has chosen to continue its deficit spending. It is trying to wedge the conservatives in this next election to cut cut cut and also make the new Democrats who are pushing for stronger social policy that will actually help Canadians and their pocketbook anxieties, too far to the left. I think Canadians deserve more and we'll see what happens later this year.

AMT: Okay well you've given us something to watch for. Thank you very much for your time today.

JOHN DUFFY: Thanks.

KATHLEEN MONK: Thank you.

ANGELA WRIGHT: Thank you.

AMT: John Duffy founder of StrategyCorp, former liberal strategist. Angela Wright freelance political writer and conservative strategist in Toronto, both of them Kathleen Monk, principle at Earnscliffe Strategy, former NDP strategists. Stay with us. The news is next. This is The Current.

Back To Top »

How ditching hospital gowns for clothes is helping patients regain a sense of humanity

Guests: Paul Wright, Brian Dolan, Karen Marley

AMT: Hello I'm Anna Maria Tremonti and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

AMT: Still to come: As the world reels in the wake of the terror attack in New Zealand that left 50 Muslims dead, attention is turning to the online community there propped up even galvanized the gunmen. The Internet has turned out to be fertile ground for white supremacist group sent far right extremists. We are looking at what authorities are doing to combat their rise in Canada in half an hour. But first fighting P.J. paralysis.

AMT: It has been called the healthcare systems prison jumpsuit, the hospital gown, what everyone wears in every hospital across the country basically around the world. Some health care professionals are starting to ask whether the robes may be making patients sicker or at least hindering their recovery, not because they're infected with bacteria or disease, but because of the message they send to those who wear them. You are sick. Critics even have a name for the condition 'P.J. paralysis'. Hospitals in the United Kingdom, Australia and now Canada, are trying to end this PJ paralysis by getting patients out of bed dressed and moving around more. Patients say it does make a difference. Rozalia Meichl has been staying at the Foothills Medical Center in Calgary for four and a half months. She's paralyzed from the chest down.

SOUNDCLIP

When you get up in the morning, get cleaned up and get dressed, and get more mobile, you are more apt to heal faster. It just feels good to be dressed. It just makes you feel more -- more like a person and less like, for lack of better terms, invalid.

AMT: The medical staff say they see a difference in patients. Sarah Staples is an occupational therapist at the Foothills Medical Center in Calgary.

SOUNDCLIP

Everybody benefits from being in their own close. You're orientated that it's daytime you know it's time to get up in get dressed for the day. Also it gives each person here a sense of identity on the unit. So when everyone is in the same hospital class everyone looks the same. And patients have said to me they feel more like themselves and they feel healthier. One person commented on not having her bottom showing anymore and things like that. So some logistical aspects of not wearing a gown.

AMT: Paul Wright is at the forefront of the effort in Canada on this frontier. He is a registered nurse in Alberta. He is the manager of patient and family centered care with Alberta Health Services and he joins us from our Calgary studio. Hi.

PAUL WRIGHT: Good morning.

AMT: She just made a really good point. Those gowns. Nobody really likes them do they?

PAUL WRIGHT: No that's for sure. As you alluded to at the top of the show you know it's been termed the new prison jumpsuit for healthcare is the hospital gown. So we had patients often tell us that they can't really question a lot of things when they're in hospital and they feel less like themselves and more vulnerable too, it reminds them that they are ill.

AMT: So it's called PJ paralysis. What is that really?

PAUL WRIGHT: Yes. It's a unique way to describe the negative physical and psychological effects patients experience who spend lengthy periods of time inactive, in a hospital gown well while in hospital. I feel it really resounds around two key principles. One is respect and dignity which is one of the key focuses for a patient family centered care. And that's really ensuring that patients feel that they have the dignity while in hospital, that they are respected and honored and welcomed to wear their own clothing. It's really important that they have that sense of identity that they feel that they can question their medical team and understand that they are a part of their care while they're in hospital.

AMT: So how did this start in Alberta?

PAUL WRIGHT: We had a situation part of a program with Patient Family Centred Care we look at how we can understand and honor of the patient voice, have them at the table for a planning, education, policy development. And we are doing an in-depth review at one of our hospitals here in Calgary and a concern came across that patients as we know are not too keen on wearing a hospital gown. And one unfortunate situation, a patient felt that they were exposed to the public that it was something that they were really concerned about. They wanted us to make a huge difference. So we looked in do okay what can we do? There is no policy or procedure around having patients wear a hospital gown for most cases of care. So we wanted to ensure that we could bust that myth and really encourage patients to have their own clothing. So during that piece we reached out and found Brian Donnelly who really is leading the campaign internationally around PJ paralysis. He is focusing on getting patients up dressed and moving and really tackling the deconditioning of patients while they're in the hospital. So really focusing only not on the importance of wearing their own clothing and making them feel it themselves, but also the physical effects that while you're in hospital having care around the bedside - I like to bed-centricity. All carers is typically around the bed set in a hospital environment. So how can we break that up and encourage patients to see physically fit to the point where they're strong if not stronger when they leave the hospital from when they came in.

AMT: So what does the staff do differently now?

PAUL WRIGHT: The focus is it's not just with the staff. It's with the patients and families. So encouraging them to bring in their clothing is one key piece. Letting them know that taking a harm reduction approach around outlining some of the secondary effects of being kind of sedate or laying in your bed. It lets them know that it increases the risk of disability that potentially could tackle fight against pressure ulcers, blood clots and even falls by seeing stronger. So one big fact for us is we know that if you're deconditioned or you're becoming weaker while in hospital, you have a much higher risk of needing institutional care at discharging. Currently in Canada we know long term care placements, there is a need to ensure that we have the right people in the right place. So if we can avoid any of these transitions and get patients safely home, feeling confident about their care and how they can help on that care, that's a big goal for us.

AMT: And what are the patients saying? How do they feel when they get out of pajamas and they're in their own clothes in the hospital all day?

PAUL WRIGHT: Early data is really positive. Patients are feeling that it's generally impacting their overall experience of their hospital stay. They're encouraged to get up and moving. They've told us select shifted their perspective of feeling sick to getting better and it's making them more likely to get up out of bed.

AMT: More purposeful, uh?

PAUL WRIGHT: Absolutely. Yes. You know I like to equate it to an old army adage. The first thing you do in the morning is you get up, you get dressed, you make your bed. More tasks you do early in the morning, more likely to continue do those tasks. And especially for a senior population when you are dressed in the morning, you're far less likely to go back to bed. So are you going to stay up for your meals, emulate a bit, visit with other patients staff and we encourage that mobility piece.

AMT: And what are you seeing in some of the patients then as they put their own clothes on?

PAUL WRIGHT: You see a sense of joy pride and self-identity as well. You know it allows them to have some conversation here in Alberta where were very famous for our cowboy culture, our rancher culture. So one specific patient in one of our sites that's involved in this initiative. Very quiet gentleman, didn't have a lot to say to the staff, a lot to say other patients. As part of the program we encourage him to his own clothes and have that sense of identity. So he had his cowboy hat, cowboy boots on, his Wrangler jeans and headed out in his wheelchair. And really became the talk of the town. He was encouraged to connect with other patients and you could really see is added to change from that 'I'm sick I'm in the hospital' to 'hey I'm getting a little bit better, I'm out chatting with people. I'm feeling pretty good today'.

AMT: It really affects other people's sense of other people's identities doesn't it?

PAUL WRIGHT: Absolutely.

AMT: You're no longer just another person in that yellow or blue gown whatever colour it is. Everybody kind of melds together are dressed like that.

PAUL WRIGHT: Absolutely. Patients have told us that they feel it's shifting their focus from being seen as a medical condition to being the person in those clothings to being themselves. Really helping their caregiver relationship as well. So it's breaking down that they're not just a medical condition but they're there themselves.

AMT: Are there good reasons for gowns sometimes like are they more sterile at times or anything like that, or is that not the issue?

PAUL WRIGHT: Yeah that's a great question. So I think there's a big myth in health care that the hospital gown is a sterile piece of clothing and actually that's not true at all. It's laundered in a very special way but it's clean just like we would clean our own clothes at home. So specifically it's something that we love to bust that myth about. But you're right. There are acts absolutely times that we would encourage patients to wear gown things such as a diagnostic imaging test, going for a C.T. scan, a chest x ray. We want to ensure that we have the best clarity of images possible. Certain things like medal button snaps can impede the ability to have that clear imaging. We don't want our patients to be exposed to multiple x-rays so there's definite reasons like that. We just finished a flu season. So you know if a patient wants to wear their hospital gown for specific medical reasons such as isolation precautions, or they have big wounds or drains, so it's ultimately their choice. But you're right there absolutely are reasons why we should still wear hospital gown from time to time. But it's about 80 percent of the time we would encourage patients to be in their own clothing.

AMT: So how long have you been doing this?

PAUL WRIGHT: This started actually in April of last year. We had the creator of the program brand [unintelligible] came to speak to us in Calgary and from that moment we've been engaging patients and families in this work and are rolling it out. Our first pilot say it happened at the General Hospital here in Calgary this past fall. Now we have six hospitals here in the Calgary zone and it's spread across all the other health services as well.

AMT: And you're helping Saskatchewan as well?

PAUL WRIGHT: Yes it's been a great partner partnership. The use of social media is not something that we typically use in healthcare. I think it's something we're starting to understand that it can help us around to see what's working elsewhere. Where are those great needs to collaborate. And this was an example of using social media, sharing what we're doing in Calgary. We were reached out by a couple of colleagues in Saskatchewan to say 'hey can you help us out, we want to know a little bit more about this' and they embarked in their journey about three weeks ago. So they're now going forward with this in Saskatchewan, too.

AMT: And you mentioned Brian Dolan he's waiting in the wings to talk to us a little bit more about their studies that got you so interested. So Paul Wright, thanks for your time.

PAUL WRIGHT: Thanks for having me.

AMT: That was Paul Wright he's a registered nurse and the manager of patient and family centred care with Alberta Health Services. He joined us from Calgary.

SOUNDCLIP

[Group of people singing]

AMT: Hashtag #EndPJPparalysis is having a moment on social media; videos of dance mobs, poems, songs popping up, cheeky music such as the one you just heard performed by the staff at a hospital in England. The Bohemian Rhapsody inspired lyrics were written by my next guest, the pioneer and founder of End PJ Paralysis. You heard our last guest Paul Wright mention him. Brian Dolan is a visiting professor of nursing at the Oxford Institute of Nursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Research in the UK. Hello Brian Dolan.

BRIAN DOLAN: Good morning how are you?

AMT: Well you even wrote a song. I know this project got to be near and dear to you.

[Laughter]

BRIAN DOLAN: [Cross talking] the way you do.

AMT: I want the rest of the lyrics. I was sorry to cut them off there. But in your experience how serious is PJ paralysis, then?

BRIAN DOLAN: In many ways it`s the silent harm and silent epidemic in healthcare and that has been hidden in plain sight. And we have known about what's called deconditioning which is a loss of a whole series of bodily functions since about the mid 1940s. And there was a paper written back then by a psychiatrist called Dr. Richard Asher and he talked about the dangers of going to bed. And he identified pretty much every single body system that it impacts on. You know if you spend, particularly once you hit the age of about 80, kind of hockey sticks up in terms of impact. It affects all people but the older you get the more harm is caused, but if you spend one week in a hospital bed you will lose 20 percent of your quads power. That is about the muscles of the back of your legs that enable you to stand. You'll lose 10 percent of your aerobic capacity, your general fitness. You'll lose one and have kilos of muscle mass. And you'll lose up to 20 percent of your blood volume. So when people get up that is why they feel so dizzy. But also means you know pressure sores, constipation, skin integrity is compromised and even people just feel miserable. And we all do you know when you stuck in bed you kind of feel sorry for yourself feeling sorry. So it really has a very significant impact. But it's only more laterally. This thing has been hidden in plain sight. We're starting a conversation. That's what essentially this is, a conversation to encourage people to get up dressed and moving.

AMT: And it's not solely the getting dressed then it is it is the moving. It's that sense of purpose that once you're dressed you are more willing to get up and move I suppose then if you have to go down that far, clutching the back of your gown because it's wide open.

BRIAN DOLAN: Absolutely, we call it ICU for a reason [cutting] those gowns. And it is I mean the cherry on the cake if you like, is wearing your clothes because that's about your dignity, your sense of self identity. Because pyjamas make you perceive yourself as unwell. Those clothes make you perceive yourself as feeling better. But the mobilization is absolutely critical to this.

AMT: So what prompted you to do this?

BRIAN DOLAN: Well it's been hidden in plain sight for a long long time. I've been talking about valuing patients time as the most important currency in health care. And one question for everyone who's listening in is: if you had a thousand days left to live how many would you choose to spend in hospital? And the answer for most of us is not at all. So working through that I've had sort of quite a long time on what would be one tangible way to enable people to have their time valued. And that was an inspirational moment literally when I was in the outback of Australia, and I met a charge nurse and we talked about this and there was a sub acute rehab unit, about mobilizing patients. And I'd been in Nottingham a few weeks before and we talked about valuing time and it kind of started over there in the UK. But people come into hospital. They get into their pajamas and then they are paralysed in their pajamas. So the hash tag #EndPJParalysis was born in fact in the outback.

AMT: And so interesting and can you see a direct link to their financial impact for hospitals?

BRIAN DOLAN: Yes there is and you know you can't fix a deficit focusing on a deficit. Chasing money doesn't get good results. If you work and focus on the quality that's when you will save the dollars but there is real savings. So this week we ran a program in across the United Kingdom back in April to June of last year where we ended up put over 700,000 patients who were up and dressed and moving. But what is one of the places that did it are 2000 bed health system in the north west of England called the Northern Care Alliance. They found a reduction in falls and falls many people end up staying in hospital longer. They found a reduction in pressure sores which are - leaving aside the pain and discomfort - it also means a cost attached. But it also reduced their leg to stay by almost two days. And that means people are not lying on a corridor in an emergency department. I mean people are getting home to their loved ones. And it means a reduced cost. But the key to it is about valuing patients time as the most important currency and all of the benefits that are true from that.

AMT: So that's pretty huge though. In hospitals where there are a waiting list to get in, where everyone is are we is looking at ways to make health care more efficient. This actually adds up.

BRIAN DOLAN: Absolutely it does. You do this at scale and you're making significant impact for patients. You're having a health system where people don't wait needlessly, don't suffer needless harm because the longer you wait in hospital your harm is not waiting is not passive. It correlates with harm. And we've said for decades to people 'come in to hospital you'll be safe there'. Now going yes about dash. You know so we know that it's better for people to get home sooner. It also means that waiting this shorten and we do the right thing and again, nationally across the English data, what they found is fewer people waiting long times in emergency departments and people are spending less time in hospital. It's also very important to stress, Anna Maria, that we're not saying that correlation equals causation but it's certainly something going on as a consequence. And is better for patients. And whenever something works the patients it always works for staff as well.

AMT: And I would imagine that if they are feeling better and more purposeful then when they go home and are still recovering they'll continue that and that can have benefits that aren't even being tracked yet.

BRIAN DOLAN: Absolutely right and there's a fantastic-- she works in the National Health Service in the UK. She's called Sonya Nosheen and she go she has a SonyaSparkles.com website, she's a classic sketch artist, and she's written one of her #EndPJParalysis in the home which is encouraging people when they're at home to mobilize. Because it's so important. Amont the most distressing statistics I heard recently was something in the range of 70 percent of people who go to a rest home and never go outside again. And that's really quite troubling and you know I talked about 20 percents of muscle loss and all of these sorts of things. But you know if you spend a week in a hospital bed, past the age of 80 you are five times more likely to end up in a care home than back in your home.

AMT: Brian Dolan these numbers are quite staggering. I think you've started a revolution. Thanks for speaking with me.

BRIAN DOLAN: Thank you so much.

AMT: Brian Dolan and founder of #EndPJParalysis and Director of Health Service 360 UK.

SOUNDCLIP

[Music]

AMT: You're listening to the current on CBC Radio One I'm Anna Maria Tremonti. We had a big response to a story we brought you Monday about the importance of reading out loud. Arthur Meghan Cox Gurdon talked about the pleasures of reading to children including her five kids and two adults as well, but also about the benefits science has shown for the brain. Here is Meghan Cox Gurdon talking about her own family.

SOUNDCLIP

I remember once having that extraordinary moment where I looked around and I thought this is it. This is the stuff I was reading the book. I had two toddlers on my lap. I didn't have the fifth baby at that point so just four of them. My son was stretched out on the back of the sofa behind my shoulders kind of like a jaguar, had another daughter, my eldest daughter tucked in next to me, and on the floor my husband was lying there in his suit having just come home from work to join the story. And I thought I am really doing something real here. And I'm thrilled to discover through the research from my book that that wasn't just the kind of gauzy impression. It's true we really do something very significant when we read aloud.

AMT: Meghan Cox Gurdon she wrote The Enchanted hour and we were talking about that and reading out loud. Karen Marley produced the story and she is with me to share some of your feedback. Hi Karen.

KAREN MARLEY: Hi Anna Maria.

AMT: So a lot of people shared their favorite moments of reading aloud.

BRIAN DOLAN: And I definitely agree. My daughters and I are reading Pippi Longstocking together right now and I love it. Although I have to say we're getting nowhere close to an hour a day of reading aloud.

AMT: Well that might be a little hard sometimes you'll be able to relate to what Amy Paradis posted on Facebook. She writes: "After a day of what can often be described as chaos in a house with little boys, our reading time offers a calming bonding experience for all of us. I get just as much out of it as they do maybe more".

KAREN MARLEY: Absolutely. Same goes for me. Patricia Paul Carson of Ottawa writes: "No mention was made of grandparents, but reading to my two and a half year old granddaughter the same stories that were read to me by both my mother and my grandmother, I am connecting two generations back and two generations forward.".

AMT: And from Lillooet, B.C. Alice Kidd writes: "My husband has dementia for a number of years I spent at least an hour a day reading to him. He loved stories about historical B.C, young adult adventure and especially magazine columns about racing and restoring cars and motorcycles. He's moved on in his journey and the reading has changed. Now when I read Dr. Seuss, especially if I ran the circus, he relaxes, smiles and occasionally tears up. I can give him joy".

KAREN MARLEY: This comes from Tracey Lefaivre in Calgary. "My dad has got a major concussion right before her convocation which required a performance since she was a performing arts major. Her anxiety was so bad prior to opening night that she wasn't sleeping which made her symptoms worse. So from across the country I did the only thing I knew. I pulled her favourite book and read aloud to her over the phone until she finally fell asleep".

AMT: These are such great stories. Chiarra Ferraro Wong wrote from Halifax: "When I was 12 I was on a camping trip with my family. I brought the final Harry Potter book. My older brother wanted to read it as well so we started taking turns reading to each other in the tent. We started doing accents and actions for different characters. We read during the whole trip. We never wanted to leave the tent."

KAREN MARLEY: And finally Daphne Kelgard from Cranbrook B.C. says: "I once took a friend's two young sons from Waterloo to Toronto on the train for the day coming home. I was reading Charlotte's Web to them and after a while I became aware that many of the regular commuters were listening intently to the story too".

AMT: A good kind of eavesdropping. Everbody loves the story. Thank you Karen.

KAREN MARLEY: Thank you that's a fun one to work on.

AMT: Karen Marley is a producer on The Current and thank you to everyone who wrote. If you missed the original conversation I was speaking with Meghan Cox Gurdon. She wrote a book called The Enchanted Hour. You can listen directly from our website cbc.ca/thecurrent, or on podcast, find it on the CBC Radio app. Coming up next, a look at the spread of far right extremism online and what Canadian authorities are doing to stop it. I'm Anna Maria Tremonti. This is The Current on CBC Radio One, Sirius XM, Online on cbc.ca/thecurrent, on podcast and on your radio app.

Back To Top »

There are no far-right groups on Canada's terror watchlist. This expert says we need to talk about that

Guests: Barbara Perry, Jennifer Hollett, Stephanie Carvin

AMT: I may Anna Maria Tremonti this as The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

It doesn't matter if the color of your skin is different but terror is terror. Pulling a trigger on someone is pulling the trigger on someone. The finger is a finger. It doesn't matter what religion you ascribe to, what color your from what creed you practice what orientation you're from. Killing is killing. Herding is herding. It needs to be recognised.

AMT: That is Momin Saeed of the Alberta Muslim Public Affairs Council speaking at a memorial for the victims of the New Zealand attacks. The group is calling for Canada to take stronger action against far right extremist organizations. It wants to see far right groups added to the government's terror watch list and more money put toward radicalization programs. My next guest says concerns about the growth of the far right are justified. Barbara Perry is one of Canada's leading researchers on far right extremism. She's a professor of criminology and the director of the Center on Hate, Bias and Extremism at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology. Barbara Perry is in Oshawa, Ontario. Hello.

BARBARA PERRY: Good morning Anna Maria.

AMT: How big a threat do far right groups pose in Canada?

BARBARA PERRY: It's a pretty substantial threat and I think more than most people would anticipate. When we published a study in 2015 we identified just over 100 active groups. And in last little that we've been we have been estimating 25 to 30 percent increase. But when we started to name the groups and sort of create out less work looking at more than 200 closer to 300 active groups across the country. That sort of online and offline. But I think in addition to the absolute numbers are the activities that they're engaged in. So in that same report we identified between 1985 and 2014 about 120 incidents of violence associated with the far right, ranging from assaults to arson to homicides in fact. To put that in context during the same period of time we identified that eight incidents of violence associated with Islam inspired extremism. Just consider that in the past five years alone there have been 19 homicides just in mass murders attributable to the ar right as well. You know starting with Justin Bourque shooting and killing three RCMP officers, Alexandre Bissonnette shooting six muslim in prayer in 2017 and then Minassian took 10 lives in his van attack in Toronto. Those were all anmated by some variant, some thread the far right ideology.

AMT: And I do believe the van attack charge it has not gone to trial yet, am I right? We're still waiting for the trial.

BARBARA PERRY: That's right.

AMT: So coming out of the attacks in New Zealand what are you seeing coming out of some of these Canadian far right groups that you're tracking?

BARBARA PERRY: The response online has really been quite sickening because it has been you know glorifying the shooters, celebrating the attacks, things like '50 is not enough'. Just really appalling the level of intensity rather than-- I should say actually there are some people just that this was this was too much and I'm out of here. But that's been a very small minority rather. It really has been much more laudatory than critical. So it's feeding I think, feeding that to Islamophobia xenophobia that caracterise these groups.

AMT: What you include under the broad category of far right extremism?

BARBARA PERRY: Well it's really broad and that's why for example we include Minassian's attack in there. I mean he was animated misogynists through this as we know from his engagement with the Incel groups online. So it really boils down to nationalism and nationalism are defined through the lens of race obviously and culture and religion, but also gender and the appropriate relationships between genders as a proper place for fairer for men than for women especially from a perspective of the move in terms of the role of women in your perpetuating the next race. So it really revolves around the defense of the nation and the defence of this white Christian European identity that the groups share. So yeah so it's obvious as misagony, it's racism, islamophobia, it's anti-Semitism are all of those pieces. Some elements and some groups highlight some of those elements more than others.

AMT: I want to ask about one group in particular. The Aberta Muslim Public Affairs Council has raised concerns about a group called the 3 percent. Listen to Momin Saeed who we heard from just a few minutes ago on this group.

SOUNDCLIP

Our first demands deals with the presence of alt right armed militia groups here in Alberta who are known as 3 percent. They are ready to wage war on our soil and specifically to cause maximum damage.

AMT: Who are the 3 percent, Barbara Perry?

BARBARA PERRY: Well 3 percenters they take their name from the American militia of the same name. Originally the American group said they had no to do with us. They weren't affiliated. I think now they're sort of embracing them in some respects. And I think you're right to be especially concerned about this group. They are, many of them, by their own admission are former or current members of the military or law enforcement. So they have that paramilitary and military training and they're heavily armed and we know that from the images that they themselves have posted on their website. It's not just in Alberta, it's in Quebec and in other parts of the country as well. So they are heavily armed. They know how to use those arms for mass assault. And they're shaped by xenophobia and in particular right now you're really targeting Muslims and also immigrants who are not white as well. So they've been engaging in street patrols like the soldiers of Odin, really monitoring mosques and Muslim community centres in particular. So yeah there's serious reason to be concerned about this group.

AMT: Now the other Muslim Public Affairs Council is calling for the 3 percent to be added to Canada's list of terrorist entities. Would you agree with that? Should they be?

BARBARA PERRY: Well I certainly think we need to start having that conversation about how we define terrorist entities from that perspective. I think the list I've forgotten the number on there but there is only one group in there that has not somehow related to Islam in that I think is a Tamil groups. So there's been a very broad definition I think that has been applied. So when you have this this combination of ideological motivation and arms and the intent to - again they're very explicit on their website - the intent to defend through force if necessary, their nation. It seems they're coming awfully close to the outline of what we make defined as terrorism.

AMT: So am I right in understanding there are currently no far right or white supremacist groups on Canada's terror list?

BARBARA PERRY: That's right. That's right. There is a similar list is terrorist incidents. Until very recently again there were no far right attacks in there. Anders Breivik attack has been added to that list. Now I have looked at the last little while the last month or so couple of months. Im not sure. I should have looked at that whether Minassian for example is on there and Bissonnette is on there.

AMT: I should note that we requested comment on this from Canada's Minister of Public Safety, Ralph Goodale. We got a statement last night that I am going to quote here: "Canada's law enforcement agencies take our security threats very seriously including those posed by right wing extremists and have robust measures in place to address them." End quote. Barbara Perry, do they use those robust measures?

BARBARA PERRY: Well it didn't seem that they have to date. It is interesting just this morning in the paper I read that Paul Fromm may be facing hate crime charges for reposting and sharing the manifesto from the New Zealand shooter. And I think that's part of the problem that we have fairly limited legislation to pursue these folks. You know law enforcement intelligence are reticent to use terrorism legislation but they haven't been that much more active in terms of pursuing the hate crime angle either. So you know I think there are a few things here that we have to work through our legislation in whether it's up to the task of defining terrorism more broadly, even in light of legislation we have. Is it being invoked, effectively, and I would say evenly across the world.

AMT: And what role has the Internet and social media played in helping the far right groups grow, become more interconnected and be normalized?

BARBARA PERRY: Oh it's been a remarkable boon to the movement. When I started looking white supremacist groups when I was still teaching in the U.S. more than 20 years ago, the internet was not that useful it was not very sophisticated ye.t the websites, the few websites associated with the movement were really one way transmission materials are there. They often relied on hardcopy newsletters that would come in a plain brown wrapper by mail. So the Internet's just been incredible in terms of increasing obviously accessibility to the material. But more than that it is interactive. It engages people in a dialogue. It allows them to read and reaffirm and reinforce and empower one another. So it really enabled them to create a collective identity and not just the localizers, not just those in the GTA or you know those in Edmonton, but people in Yellowknife are able to connect and dialogue with people in White Church, with people Bern, people in Paris. So it's really that collective identity global identity around the White, their white European heritage. And I think that that is one of the things that has really strengthened the movement in terms of getting that reinforcement, that we're in this together this is something much bigger than just an individual or even just a group in one city.

AMT: Barbara Perry thanks for your work tracking this.

BARBARA PERRY: Thank you for paying attention.

AMT: Barbara Perry director of the center Unhate bias and extremism at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology. She's in Oshawa Ontario. Well as you know the massacre in New Zealand was streamed live on Facebook. It was up for 29 minutes before it was taken down. 4000 people apparently watched it. It started being shared and by the time it was taken down the 29 minute mark. It lasted 17 minutes. And Facebook has reported that no one who watched those first, the fourth 17 minutes actually reported anything wrong with what they were seeing. We asked Facebook, YouTube and Twitter for comment. You Tube told us quote "hate speech and content that promotes violence have no place on YouTube". End quote. A spokesman for Twitter Canada told us quote "We prohibit behavior in content that targets individuals based on protected categories including race, ethnicity, national origin or religious affiliation. This includes references to violent events where protective groups have been the primary target or victims" end quote. And Facebook wrote statement as well about what it calls hate organizations. Here's the quote "we ban these organizations and individuals from our platforms and also remove all praise and support. When we become aware of it" end quote. So that is what they say. Jennifer Hollett is joining me now. She's a digital strategist. She's the former head of news environment for Twitter. And she is in our Toronto studio. Hi.

JENNIFER HOLLETT: Hi nice to be here.

AMT: Nice to have you with us. And of course you've been on the other side.

JENNIFER HOLLETT: I have, inside, where these companies are desperately trying to catch up.

AMT: We just heard the quotes - 'we don't do this, we don't allow this' - doesn't actually jive with what we see.

JENNIFER HOLLETT: That's the policy. But here's the reality. So taking a look at the livestream the terrorist attacked in New Zealand, the link was also posted on HN which is a dark corner of the web where there is a community for white supremacy and white nationalism right. So there is an audience already tuning in. The fact that no one flag the content, to me raises the question do Facebook users - outside of the people who actually this content - even know that they can report inappropriate content, extremist content and that action will be taken?

AMT: They report all sorts of things.

JENNIFER HOLLETT: For sure that's true. The problem here is within the first 24 hours the video, even though was removed from Facebook, was uploaded one point five million times. Facebook using artificial intelligence technology was able to block one point two million videos at upload, but 300,000 copies of the video got through. So that's a failure at scale. But those numbers are really alarmin. I mean these are people who have access to the original video. They're trying to get it up on Facebook after it's already been taken down.

AMT: And they know. Obviously they know this and they can keep coming back. So what kind of conversations did you see happening when you were at Twitter about five rate heat content and how it should be handled?

JENNIFER HOLLETT: Yeah. So the tech companies - that's what I saw working at Twitter - are trying to keep up and respond to hate speech online as well as abuse and that includes this extremist content. A lot of work has been done by big tech that includes Twitter, that includes Facebook, that includes Google which owns YouTube in regards to extremist Internet content, but usually associated with groups like Daesh also known as ISIS and ISIL, as we've seen a mainstreaming of white nationalism and white supremacy in countries like Canada US in New Zealand. It actually has been using channels in networks like Twitter, like YouTube, like Facebook but often the way that isn't extreme and I think that's actually the bigger challenge - not just for attack but also for all of this - is how it's playing out. Well it's not a video of 50 people being shot.

AMT: And it gets into the whole issue of free expression, right?

JENNIFER HOLLETT: It does get into the issue of free expression in the balance in the work that the Canadian government is doing right now to counter radicalization to violence, is trying to ensure that we are protecting our human rights and Charter rights as Canadians which includes freedom of expression, but also groups who are likely to be targeted. And as I mentioned earlier on the show that includes women, immigrants, racialized people as well as religious groups.

AMT: And you know we know that a number of white supremacists - and these are Americans. The KKK, David Duke, The White Nationalist Richard Spencer - actually have a accounts on Twitter.

JENNIFER HOLLETT: Yes. So what happened at Twitter is early days, a verification was created just so people knew that the author or a celebrity or a politician was who they say they were. There are a lot of fake accounts and spoof accounts on Twitter. And that's actually part of the culture. Sometimes those parody accounts people follow deliberately. But the verification was actually just to identify who this person was and that they were actually that person. And what Twitter saw actually was that there were some white supremacists that ended up with verification the most high profile one would be Richard Spencer. But it was never to actually endorse Richard Spencer It was just to say that this notable figure in culture, on TV, is who he says years. But due to feedback from the community and from activists as well as journalists Twitter actually paused verifications. And in a bold move started removing verification from these accounts connected to the White Supremacy Movement. And actually right now vacations are on pause. So yes Richard Spencer does still have an account but he has been taken away that social currency that comes with verification. And that's an attempt to get ahead of some of these issues on the platform.

AMT: But again they still have the platform. I'm just wondering, as somebody who has been on both sides, everyone is very sensitive as well to free speech. There is a line. People cross that line. There are subtle lines. What do you think the Canadian government could be doing here? Can they get away with 'Oh you know it’s very sophisticated, we really can't do anything' what do you think they have to do?

JENNIFER HOLLETT: Yes this is a very fluid space. Things are always changing and I think thats one of the things that's very challenging for big tech, as well as the government which is actually keeping up with how these extremists are using new technology in social spaces, in the mainstream whether it's Facebook or Twitter with the manifesto and the attack that we saw in New Zealand, or in the dark web which is kind of like the black market or underground of the Web. And right now they're behind and that's both the government and big tech. So it needs to be made a priority. The Canadian government released the National Strategy on countering radicalization of violence on December 11th of last year. So I think it's important that government commits to strategy it's not enough just to have it but to make it a priority and give it the resources it deserves. And in that strategy it includes working directly with tech companies but also non-profits and Canadians at large, including young people who are the most likely to be radicalized. So this is where we come into this which is actually to learn more about this strategy which has a flexible framework as it should to be able to respond to this. Also the prime minister of Australia has called on the G-20 to make sure that this issue is on the agenda at the upcoming meeting in June. I think it's an opportunity for Canada to show some leadership there.

AMT: The Europeans are ahead of everybody on this right. I mean they've come down like a hammer our compliance with big fines. Do you see other countries doing this?

JENNIFER HOLLETT: Yeah we've seen a lot of leadership in Europe as it relates to fighting counter terrorism and other issues on social media and part of that is the history right. If you look at Germany for example there are some groups there are banned with the social media networks in Germany that aren't in Austria. So we do know that regulation works. It has to be thoughtful.

AMT: Thanks for coming in.

JENNIFER HOLLETT: Nice to be here. Jennifer Hollett is a digital strategist. She's the former head of news and government for Twitter Canada and she's in our Toronto studio.

SOUNDCLIP

These same families who fled violence in their homelands are now too often met by a new kind of violence when they reach new shores. Anti-immigrant hatred, right wing extremists, white nationalist, Neo Nazi terrorists. These groups are alive in Canada.

AMT: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaking in the House of Commons after the massacre in New Zealand. We've been hearing about the rise of right wing extremism in this country. I want to talk a little bit about the national security agencies such as CSIS and why they should be doing about it. So we are joined by Stephanie Carvin. She's an assistant professor at Carleton University's Norman paratime score of international affairs. She's a former national security analyst with CSIS. She is Ottawa. Hi Stephanie. Good morning. So how much is the Internet responsible for the proliferation of hate in Canada.

STEPHANIE CARVIN: I think you know listening to the two previous guests, it's quite clear that the Internet is playing a role, that you know the access to ideas is very important in the way we understood it - particularly when we're looking at Islamist extremism as we talked about polarization. The idea, people sometimes called it groupthink, but the psychologists call it polarization that groups that are kind of closed off, that talk to each other that reaffirm ideas tend to move to the extreme over time. And certainly some of the reporting about the New Zealand shooter, that certainly seems to be the case, to the point where he said 'Hey guys guess what I'm no longer just going to sit here and post things on the internet I'm actually going to do something over time' and that's what you worry about. At the same time I think we hear a lot about the Internet and the Internet - again with the two previous guests very important - but basically individuals who've been studying this for some time also look at the in person contacts. So radicalization is social. Now you’re wondering what social ills make depend on who you are as a person. But a lot of times what we also look for is are these people kind of moving beyond the Internet as well in looking to see if these people are meeting up with like-minded individuals as well. So the thing for research is that the information on the Internet is all there and so that's what we tend to study. But I think where we need more research to understand in person aspects of this as well.

AMT: Well there are currently no far right or white supremacist groups on Canada's terror list. Should there be?

STEPHANIE CARVIN: You know we may be moving into that space and that's a question that the national security agencies are thinking of themselves. People have commented quite frequently really in 2017, Quebec mass shooting and certainly in the last week or so, that where is CSIS on this where is the RCMP on this. They have for some time been trying to figure out well we have a certain set of tools how best should we be applying these tools. You know the problem with groups historically is that they have tended to be very local, very fractious, they form, they fall apart, they form, they fall apart. And so for that reason they kind of don't really fit our traditional models of terrorist listings. So but that being said, the way were seeing transnational ideas spread through the Internet, and the rise in in the lethality of these attacks, the seriousness of them is again driving some rethinking that's going on. But I think where the national security agencies themselves are worried about is that there's been a long standing investigations at the local and provincial levels into these groups. They don't just kind of want to burst in and suddenly try and take over the space. They want to work with the individuals who are already investigating this on the ground.

AMT: Well let me ask you. There is a there is a specific post you may have seen online this week by a white supremacist, got a lot of attention, calling on lone wolf attackers in Canada to focus on quote "priority targets including ANTIFA, Canadian Hate Network and so on. It namd news organizations including the CBC as a target. Peterborough police have said they're investigating it. What about the RCMP? What about CSIS? Why wouldn't they jump on that and help? Would they? Like have they? How do we find that out? How do we track what stuff goes beyond local?

STEPHANIE CARVIN: Well that's just said, you know this was actually something that the CSIS is a watchdog which is SIRC the Security Intelligence Review Committee. They looked into this following the Quebec 2017 shooting and they said, well you, know CSIS had actually shut down, most of its far right investigations mostly because everyone was worried about foreign fighters. So as a result of that they have reopened investigations and what SIRC revealed is that CSIS's approach is due just boost the liaising, to keep an eye on what's happening. But again for me the ideal as someone who sees this phenomenon is prosecutions. So who's best to actually prosecute these individuals for making comments like that and spreading material on that. In some cases that actually may be a local and provincial jurisdictions. But when it becomes serious enough the RCMP needs to become involved. And certainly with a threat like that, we have seen statements that the Peterburg police are investigating that threat. I am confident that there definitely would be interest from the OPP and the RCMP and that there would be information sharing in that space.

AMT: Do they even have enough resources? You know we have been covering as well the return of people who joined ISIS, and the law enforcement has made it pretty clear they couldn't possibly tell everybody 24/7. So you got one kind of extremist grouping. You've got another one. Do our lawmakers have to look at taking this much more seriously at a policy level?

STEPHANIE CARVIN: So the answer is do we have enough resources? The answer is of course not. We absolutely do not. And just because as you say we don't have enough to monitor the return from ISIS, from Syria, 24/7. The other problem is as your two previous guests noted, a lot of this activity is taking place online. One of the things we have not yet figured out is: do we want our security services monitoring the internet 24/7? Monitoring the activities of Canadians that maybe just checking out these forums or maybe on Facebook and maybe be friends with someone or a relative or someone who's actually posting this material? And that's a real risk and already we've had trouble with CSIS and getting in trouble from the federal court for ingesting certain kinds of data. And right now we're winning our legal fix for that. It's stuck in the sand it's Bill C-59. So one of the key problems we have is that we don't even have the legal tools appropriate for national security agencies to ingest legally large amount of online data.

AMT: I should say that CSIS did send out a statement saying "Canadians can be assured there is a strong and layered approach to national security that CSIS, along with our domestic and international partners vigilantly monitors potential threats and have robust measures in place to address them". That's the quote We're going to have to leave it there. Stephanie thank you for taking the time today.

STEPHANIE CARVIN: Thanks for having me on.

AMT: Stephanie Carvin. Assistant Professor Carleton University's Norman Patterson School of International Affairs. Former CSIS national security analyst. She joined us from Ottawa. That is our program for today. Stay with Radio One for Q. Im Anna Maria Tremonti. Thank you for listening to The Current.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

Full Transcript for March 20, 2019

More Stories Like This