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 September 26, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Chris Howden

CAROL OFF: Hello, I’m Carol Off.

CHRIS HOWDEN: Good evening, I'm Chris Howden. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

CH: Tonight:

CO: Jacques hammer. Former Quebec Premier Jean Charest remembers his friend Jacques Chirac — the French President whose drive for power was so relentless his countrymen called him "Le Bulldozer".

CH: All the president's maneuvers. A whistleblower says Donald Trump abused his power, and the White House put the evidence in "lockdown" — and a Democratic Congresswoman says that's clear proof the President should be impeached.

CO: Going south when everything goes south. His company's lost so much value it's been delisted from Canada's main market index — which is why our guest is shifting its focus from Alberta to the United States.

CH: Sharing her dreams in the midst of a nightmare. All 700 pages of the Second World War diary of Renia Spiegel, a Polish teenager who was killed by the Nazis, are now published in English.

CO: Thaws and prayers. He was intimately familiar with the deceased — which is why a Swiss glaciologist gave a tribute at the funeral for an Alpine glacier that's all but melted away.

CH: And...what fresh hull is this? Today, a British research vessel was officially christened the "RRS David Attenborough" -- instead of being given the name most people voted for: "Boaty McBoatface".

CH: As It Happens, the Thursday edition. Radio that won't recognize that official name — because Boaty is in the eye of the beholder.

[Music: Theme]

Part one: Jacques Chirac obit, TXS Alberta energy, Swiss glacier funeral

Jacques Chirac obit

Guest: Jean Charest

CH: They called Jacques Chirac "Le Bulldozer". And it was not because he was an easy man to push around. Mr. Chirac served 12 years as the president of France, and 20 more as the mayor of Paris. He is best remembered on the international stage for leading the opposition to the invasion of Iraq. In the face of American accusations of cowardice and betrayal, the French President never strayed from his position that the case for war had not been made. Jacques Chirac died this morning in France. He was 86. In 2003, in the run-up to the Iraq invasion, Mr. Chirac made his case to Americans during an interview with CNN.

SOUNDCLIP

JACQUES CHIRAC: [Speaking French]

TRANSLATION: From my experience on the international political stage, I'm telling my American friends beware. Be careful. Think it over seriously before you take action that is not necessary, and that can be very dangerous — especially in the fight against international terrorism, which we are really working hard on.

CH: That was former French President Jacques Chirac speaking to CNN in 2003. Jean Charest was a friend of Mr. Chirac. We reached the former Quebec Premier in Montreal.

CO: Mr. Charest, what comes to mind as you remember your friend Jacques Chirac today?

JEAN CHAREST: What comes to mind is really that we're turning a page in terms of generations politically in France, but also in the world. He was very much a person who represented perfectly what France is all about. It’s majesty. And he was a monument of French politics for 40 years. So it's sad to turn this page, but I think a lot of people will remember him very fondly.

CO: How did you become friends?

JC: Well, he spent five weeks in the Eastern Townships of Quebec — where I'm from — in the summer of 2003. he was very friends with the ex-mayor of Quebec City named Jean Pelletier, who then became Jean Chretien’s chief of staff. And he wanted to vacation in Quebec. I had been elected in April, and he was staying in North Hatley, just a kilometre from the house we rented. And we invited him over for dinner — he and his wife, Bernadette, with our three children. And we had just an unforgettable evening. They arrived around 6:30, and they left at 1:00 in the morning. We said to the kids you really need to take advantage of this opportunity to grill him on all sorts of issues, which they did. So it was an unforgettable evening. As a result of that, he in particular my eldest daughter, Emily, he offered her an opportunity to do an internship, and to work, which she did in the summer of 2006.

CO: The image we have Mr, Chirac is that he was a grand statesman, always well-dressed, that he loved the trappings of power. And yet, you're describing a man who you could call up and invite over for dinner, and he'd hang out to 1:00 in the morning. Which is the real Jacques Chirac?

JC: Oh, well it's very much both. He was he did enjoy power, and was around politics in France for 40 years as a minister, as a prime minister, as the mayor of Paris. But he was a very generous man, and he was very accessible. And, for example, every year he would show up at the Paris Agricultural Show, and he would linger. There were many stories of his staff had to pull him out because he really enjoyed that opportunity to be with the French, and to be in the rural areas in particular. So that's the man he was. Very much you know of instinct also. Very cultivated, very interested in the art from First Nations around the world. And, in fact one, of his legacies is a very beautiful museum in Paris called The Musée du quai Branly – Jacques Chirac. In which, you would find a lot of art First Nations in Canada — including the Inuit. So he was all of that at the same time. Very colorful, very energetic, he represented the best of what France had to offer.

CO: On the world stage, he is perhaps best remembered for his defiance of George Bush and Tony Blair, who wanted to go to war, did go to a war and invade Iraq. Did he talk to you about that time? Did he ever offer any insights into his decision?

JC: Well, very much so. And when I did an official visit to Paris in 2003, before the campaign as leader the official opposition at the time, we met with Dominique de Villepin. And de Villepin was the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who confronted Colin Powell at the Security Council. And a famous televised confrontation between both of them. And then the President Chirac led a number of countries in Europe who were deeply opposed to the intervention. He believed it was very badly thought out. As much as he had very deep respect for the Bush father, he felt that the Bush son had made a grave mistake by intervening in Iraq. And I'm sorry to say he was proven to be right. And my daughter made a very interesting observation after working, and said you know the French, they do know they're not the empire they once were. I mean they're very aware of that. But they do feel that they have a lot to contribute. They know a lot about certain parts of the world. And it hurts them that they had not been more consulted. And that the Bush administration did not take into account what he had to say. And that's part of the intelligence of Jacques Chirac, and what France offers the world.

CO: On the domestic stage, he had a number of fights — a number of fronts — he was working on that are now very much in the European politics. He had his own version really of Brexit that he had to deal with, and suffered a defeat in that vote. He was up against Jean-Marie Le Pen and the ultra-right movement. He was successful there. But he had his own Yellow Vest Movement, or version of it. So do you think he was aware that there were these growing tendencies in Europe, these ultra-right forces that were growing?

JC: He was very much aware of that. He knew that those forces were there, and here you have a man, by the way, who is of the generation who had been around for the Second World War at a young age, but still was very much aware of the legacy of the Second World War. That's why this generation, as they die away, they're bringing with them a great legacy in terms and a great patrimony of experience in that regard that is sometimes lost by this generation.

CO: He also had to deal with 2011, with a conviction for misusing money when he was mayor of Paris. What did that do to him?

JC: Well, that's a dark moment for him. He was sentenced to I think was two years of probation. And that was for him a more difficult moment. And it wasn't held against him a great deal. In the memory of the French people, this isn't something that will stick. But still for him, that was a much more difficult moment.

CO: Is there any particular memory, image that is going to stay with you in these days to come where we're going to hear a lot about Jacques Chirac?

JC: I visited him after he had left office with my oldest daughter, and already his health was starting to fail. But, and this is something you will hear about him, he enjoyed the company of women a great deal. And during an hour-and-a-half he ignored me totally, and talked to my daughter only [Both CO and JC chuckle] I'm exaggerating a bit, Carol. He was a very, very interesting person. And I was very lucky, we were very lucky to have him as a friend and an ally in that period of time, I thought. I thought it was a good piece of luck. so Canada — and Quebec — we’re losing a very good friend.

CO: Mr. Charest, I'm sorry for your loss.

JC: Thank you for talking.

CO: Thank you. Bye-bye.

JC: Bye-bye.

CH: Jean Charest is the former Premier of Quebec. We reached him in Montreal.

[Music: Sombre]

TSX Alberta energy

Guest: Kevin Neveu

CH: The market value of Kevin Neveu's company has gone down so much that it's been dropped from the top stock market index for Canadian companies. Precision Drilling is one of the biggest drillers in the Canadian oilpatch. But it's one of eight Canadian energy companies that just lost their spots on the S&P/TSX Composite. The de-listing is yet another marker of the lengthy downturn in Canada's energy sector. But Mr. Neveu has reassured investors that the company's operations in the United States look much more promising. We reached Kevin Neveu in Houston, Texas.

CO: Mr. Neveu, what does the dropping of these eight energy companies from the TSX Composite Index, what does this say about the state of the oil industry in Canada?

KEVIN NEVEU: It gives a clear indication of, for lack of a better term, investor disinterest or apathy towards Canadian energy equities.

CO: And why is that the case?

KN: You know for a variety of reasons right now investors are shying away from energy companies, and particularly Canadian energy companies. And I'd say that when they compare Canada to the U.S., it's really hard for investors to understand the risks in Canada. In the U.S., it's a much clearer investment opportunity. They see growth in the Permian, they see opportunities for export, they see infrastructure being built, and they see responsible development.

CO: So you think there's too much uncertainty?

KN: In Canada, there's too much uncertainty. Largely, it's political uncertainty driven by you know both federal government policy and a high degree of confusion about I'd say the environmental record of the Canadian industry.

CO: What does that mean?

KN: Well, in Canada, we have oil sands — which, of course, — everyone knows and talks about. But we also conventional oil and gas. And it seems like the conventional oil and gas industry in Canada is being painted with you know the same brush that the environmentalists painted the oil sands with. In fact, the Canadian oil and gas conventional industry — that’s gas and oil — is extremely clean. It's very low carbon footprint, very low environmental footprint. Yet, you know it doesn't appear that our politicians understand that federally. And the voting public struggles with that concept.

CO: So they're literally being tarred with the same brush?

KN: Tarred with the same brush, for lack of a better term [laughs]. But as a result, because there's so much uncertainty around pipeline takeaway capacity, and government intervention, and the Bill C69 and Bill C48, that investors don't know how to handicap the risk. So they just stay away.

CO: So how much of these eight energy companies, how much of it what they were doing was conventional? How much of it was oil sands, do you know?

KN: Essentially everything these group of companies are doing is conventional oil and gas, mostly gas, which is, of course, one of the best solutions for the transition period to lower carbon.

CO: You've moved your company to Houston. Why is that?

KN: Well, we're still a meaningful player in Canada. So we haven't moved everyone or everything. But certainly, most of our focus right now is on growth in the U.S., where we see the opportunity for growth, both for conventional oil and gas drilling, and for expansion to international markets. Whereas in Canada right now, our current activity levels are running about a third of 2014. Whereas in the U.S., we’re running close to 80 per cent of 2014 levels, if you use 2014 as a benchmark year. This year in Canada, we'll run our lowest level of Canadian activity that we've seen as a company pretty much ever. We’ll invest in capital spending in Canada on maintenance capital about 10 million dollars, and that's to repair and maintain the rigs. In the U.S. this year, it's almost 80 per cent of our peak ever. And we’ll invest over 100 million dollars of maintenance spending in the U.S. So, in fact, just due to activity levels and customer demand, most of our capital is being deployed in the U.S. Most of our decisions are being made relative to the U.S. market. So it just makes more sense that our people should be closer to the market.

CO: So is it a matter that when you mentioned the different policies, the different laws, the environmental environment, the legal and political environment in Canada, is that really the biggest issue? Or is it that in the United States, oil industry has access to, first of all, the domestic market, which is huge. And they have access to international markets. Is that really the advantage that you have in the United States?

KN: Well, it is. But these are all part and parcel the same issue. So you know in the U.S., yes, pipelines are being built across Texas to move Permian oil to the Gulf, to ship it internationally. There was a deal signed this week to export U.S. LNG to India, huge deal, multi-billion dollar deal. These deals are happening in the U.S. consistently, and capital is being deployed. In Canada, our first LNG deal is still several years away. Of course, pipelines are full. Railcars are expanding, but expanding too slowly. And for our conventional customers, to invest additional drilling in Canada right now doesn't make sense because there's nowhere to ship the oil. You know the argument is that less oil is good. And broadly — globally — I absolutely agree with that. But I also agree that in the transition period we should be using the lowest footprint oil, which Canada falls into that bucket. We are the lowest footprint oil likely in the globe.

CO: But some would argue that what we're seeing in Canada is an environment that reflects what's going on in the world. That renewable energy is displacing fossil fuels. That's the trend. And that this industry as painful as it is — especially for people in Alberta — it's reflecting where the global industry is going more than more so than in the United States. What do you say to that?

KN: Well, certainly it's fair to say that their policies have been tilted towards limiting oil production. I get that. I understand that. And on a global level, I'm supportive. But I also know that if you've got the lowest footprint oil you can produce in the world or lowest footprint gas you could produce in the world in Alberta, on a global basis, it doesn't make sense to limit that component. You should be limiting or finding ways to eliminate the most environmentally-damaging oils and socially damaging oils.

CO: Have you made this case to the government?

KN: Every opportunity we get.

CO: And what response do you get?

KN: You know, there's a political reality that that it's easy… let me back up, we've been discussing this on the phone now for several minutes, it's complicated. It's complicated to explain and compare. It's much easier just to pull the environmental card and say we're going to limit oil and gas. That's and easier argument to make politically. But scientifically, it's more complicated. And you know energy production is a very complicated process. Whether it's renewables, whether it's wind, hydrocarbon-based oil, it's all complicated. And trying to make the case for a complicated argument politically is always difficult for politicians. That said, it's incumbent on our leaders to make that case. We do have the best lowest footprint natural gas in the world. We do have the best light crude in the world from a social environmental governance perspective. And we should be finding ways to offset or limit the less environmentally responsible, governance responsible, or culturally responsible producers. that should be our role leading: leading the world, not being the first to elevate the best crudes [slight chuckle].

CO: It's extremely difficult to have a nuanced discussion in the middle of an election campaign, which is where Canada is right now, and you talk about the uncertainty in Canada. Do you see the election delivering an environment that might be better for your industry?

KN: You know it's really hard to call. There are so many issues that are all very, very important to lay down leadership. But I would tell you, I still think clear definitive leadership focused on making Canada a stronger country is important. And you know if we end up with a minority government, you don't have that clear direct leadership. You end up having a coalition. So I'm looking to see Canada emerge in this election with clear well-defined leadership focused on Canada leading the transition, not kowtowing to either fringe views or non-scientific positions.

CO: And you're not talking about the environmental movement capitulating to your view. You're saying that there is some kind of compromise?

KN: Oh, it’s not compromise. I actually think it's a robust developed plan to transition down the carbon chain.

CO: And you support that transition?

KN: Absolutely support that transition, and support the use of the most environmentally, ethically, socially-friendly hydrocarbons as you wean down the carbon chain, which will take a long time.

CO: Mr. Neveu, I really appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

KN: Great. Thank you.

CH: Kevin Neveu is the President of Precision Drilling. We reached him in Houston, Texas.

[Music: Instrumental]

Swiss glacier funeral

Guest: Matthias Huss

CH: In Switzerland, a group of 250 people gathered on the weekend to mourn the loss of a loved one. But it wasn't a person — it was a glacier. The Pizol glacier has shrunk so much that it will no longer be monitored. That's a first in Switzerland. Matthias Huss is a glaciologist who has been studying this glacier for years. He was one of the organizers and speakers at the ceremony. We reached him in Zurich, Switzerland.

CO: Matthias, how do you go about mourning the end of a glacier?

MATTHIAS HUSS: Well, it's a very special thing. It's the first time this was ever done in Switzerland. We walked up to this glacier. It's a relatively small glacier. It was always a small glacier. And now, it's even much smaller. It's located in a rocky mountain flank below a summit that is quite well -known for hikers and climbers. So we walked up being about 250 people. It's quite a walk — about two hours of climbing — and we stopped on a little hill just in front of the remnants of this glacier.

CO: And what did you do there?

MH: We gathered together, we looked up to the glacier, and then there were three speeches. So I had the first speech — being the scientist among the speakers. Then there was a speaker from Louth, describing the problems as climate change in this country. And then, at last, there was a priest from their village at the bottom of the valley putting a bit of more priest's view on the disappearance and the death of a glacier. And finally, there were some rocks put at the foot of the glacier to say goodbye, kind of.

CO: And people were dressed appropriately?

MH: Yes, many people were dressed in funeral coats — like in black with hats. It was quite a funny scene to see because this is not what you would normally see at the glacier.

CO: But not a funny event was it?

MH: No, it was not at all a funny event. But nevertheless, I mean it was not the death of a person. It was different. I mean everybody knew that it's not a funeral for a living thing. But still, many of us somehow see a glacier as kind of a living thing because we have a relation built up to a glacier.

CO: This glacier, Pizol, has been monitored since 1893. But now, it’s the first to be taken off the Swiss Glacier Surveillance Network, is that right?

MH: Yes, exactly. So we're really not continuing as monitoring any longer because the data are not representative. So while we could do some measurements and I will still probably go up there next year, but more to like observe how a glacier is doing when it's actually completely vanishing and dying.

CO: So as a glacier, it’s dead. It doesn't exist anymore.

MH: I would say it is dead. Although, there is still some ice, but it's very small, and it has now fallen into individual pieces. So it's not just one glacier with high parts then I've flowing down. There are just individual pieces and remnants of the ice that are increasingly covered by debris falling from the surrounding mountains flanks. So there is still some glacier ice left. But it's very small, and it's just a sad sight.

CO: Can you tell us about the sad sight? How much has it diminished? What have you seen even in the time that you have been part of the monitoring?

MH: When I started the monitoring in 2006, from 2006 onward, so at that time, it was still already a small glacier. But it was an intact glacier — so a glacier starting at the very mountaintop, and then flowing down. the ice thickness was still more than 30 metres at several places. So it looked like a glacier. There was there was ice; it was white. And then over the years, it has diminished every year. So we didn't see a single year with some gains of the glacier. And then in 2018, so last year, it was really the tipping point that was reached because the ice got thinner and thinner. And then suddenly, it started to disintegrate. So everywhere rocks from the bottom came protruding out of the ice. And this heated up more, and then the glacier really fell into pieces. And it is now almost completely covered with these rocks and debris falling from the top. So the colour isn't white anymore. It's really gray, and dark, and you actually see that it's dying — so even a layperson can see that this glacier is not well-off.

CO: As you point out, this is not the first glacier to die in recent time. And it indicates what the impact of climate change. The scene that you set, well, it’s a bit of theatre to commemorate the end of this glacier. Does it really matter to people in Switzerland? Do you think that the death of this glacier has the same impact for the larger society as it has on you?

MH: The death of this glacier doesn't have a big impact on society. I mean it's nice. It was quite well-known for hikers, for Instagramers because it was a nice site. But if it's not there, it's not a catastrophe. But still, it was a symbol. So the ceremony was held symbolically for all glaciers in the Alps that are dying, that have died already, or are going to die in the next years. And if we consider the bigger glaciers in the Alps — and also globally — there is an impact on society.

CO: But do people in Switzerland care about this as much as you do?

MH: I hope that we have been able to send out the message. People going up to a glacier to commemorate its death, to have a funeral for a glacier. The pictures are strong, and I think the pictures can transport the message because glaciers are really an excellent element to visualize climate change. It's much more visible than just a graph of rising temperatures. So it's really people can see that the ice is disappearing. And that the Ice rising to warming temperatures is very, very clear. And therefore, I think glaciers are excellent for transporting this message. So I hope that people in Switzerland care about this as well.

CO: Matthias, thank you.

MH: You're welcome.

CO: Goodnight.

MH: Okay, goodnight.

AH: Matthias Huss is a glaciologist who has been studying the diminishing Pizol glacier for years. He held a ceremony on the weekend to commemorate it. We reached him in Zurich. And we've got more on this story on our webpage at: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Banjo]

Part two: Trump impeachment: Democrat, Polish teen journal

Trump impeachment: Democrat

Guest: Norma Torres

CH: All week we've been talking about the secret whistleblower complaint that has rocked US politics — and today, it was finally made public. In it, the unnamed intelligence official writes that he or she received information from multiple sources that President Donald Trump had used his power to, quote, "solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 US election." Unquote. The complaint stems from a phone call Mr. Trump had with Volodymyr Zelensky back in July — in which he asked the Ukrainian president to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter. Mr. Trump has repeatedly said the call was "perfect." Democrats don't agree. This week, they launched a formal impeachment inquiry. Norma Torres is a Democratic Congresswoman from California who has been calling for the President's impeachment. We reached her in Washington, DC.

CO: Representative Torres, what does the whistleblower complaint do for the case for impeachment of Donald Trump?

NORMA TORRES: The whistleblower complaint is critical to the investigation. And I think that that should continue to be our focus of an impeachment investigation. It’s clearly that the law was violated when the president asked for assistance to investigate a political opponent from a foreign country.

CO: Okay, so I want to get a bit more about what's in the complaint, and what it adds. We learned yesterday, we got a memo of the phone call, just the complaint itself — the whistleblower complaint — what we've seen of that. What does it say about how the White House knew, how people who would listen to the phone call, what indication is it that they knew that there was something seriously wrong with what had happened in that phone call?

NT: The whistleblower complaint identifies that there were several people listening. And they all came to that same conclusion: that a request had been made by the president of the United States that was illegal. And then where are the notes of all those people that were in the room? And why is the process of secret, top secret, and classified information being utilized to cover up for the illegal political practices of the president of the United States?

CO: And what happened to the actual transcript of the phone call? They were moved from where they should have been because it was, as you say, a highly-populated phone call, and it was supposed to be routine. But then it got moved where? What is it that raised alarm bells about this for the whistleblower? The cover up began from the administration’s perspective when those notes were removed. Were put into a classified system, instead of leaving it in their computer system that they utilized to store day-to-day activities. If this was truly a typical phone call that happened between two presidents or two leaders of two nations, there was no reason other than a political reason to cover up a criminal act on behalf of the president to hide that act.

CO: And that's the argument that the whistleblower — the anonymous whistleblower at this point — gives us. The White House says that the whistleblower has no firsthand knowledge. He or she was not on the phone call, did not witness anything, has heard of this from others who were there. Do you really have a smoking gun with this? Can you really prove what the whistleblower says is true?

NT: We absolutely know that what the whistleblower has been reporting is true. One, the president himself has admitted on national television that he did ask for assistance. Number two, the personal attorney — who is also implicated — has come out, and on national TV has also admitted to asking for assistance from a foreign government. That is unlawful. Both of them should know that.

CO: And in this rough transcript of this partial release, or this memo, however you want to describe it, Mr. Trump offers Rudy Giuliani and Attorney General Barr to talk further about this, to help with the investigation. President Zelensky thanks him for any help you can give us in this investigation. Do we know that there was a follow up?

NT: We don't know at this point if there was a follow up. Some of the information in that report that was released today has been blacked out. I am not confident that Attorney General Barr would be honest and upfront and transparent with Congress, given how he presented to the American people a brief summary of the Mueller Report. Let's not forget that this has been an ongoing problem with this administration that thinks that they are above the law. This is what we would refer to as a dictatorship.

CO: I want to play a bit what Mr. Trump had to say today in response.

SOUNDCLIP

DONALD TRUMP: It's a terrible thing for our country. They can't do any work. They're frozen. The Democrats are going to lose the election. They know it. That's why they're doing it. And it should never be allowed what's happened to this president.

CO: Mr. Trump is, as we know, he likes a fight. He likes a good circus. Are you offering it to him?

NT: [laughing] We're certainly not offering a good circus, a good fight, a political fight at least on this issue. I think the law is the law. And we either support the law, or we don't support the law. And if we don't support the law, then we need to change it. Because we can't impose the law on certain individuals and not on others. I think the bottom line here is that if he wants to talk about politics, we can look at you know the last three years, where Democrats have been winning in every election. Where we haven't won in deep-red states and congressional districts, we have been the closest that we have ever been to winning in those elections. So it's not about winning or losing. We don't have to take this chance that we are taking. It wasn't easy for Democrats to come to this conclusion because we are winning the political fight in the street on Election Day. This is an issue of right and wrong. And I would hope that the president of the United States would do the honest and ethical thing. And that is to protect the whistleblower, and not refer to them as spies who should be treated for as treasonous people. In other words, he is asking for violence or some harm to come to this person. That is alarming to me, and that should be alarming to every person out there.

CO: We will leave it there. Representative Torres, thank you.

NT: Thank you so much, Carol. I appreciate talking with you.

CH: Norma Torres is a Democratic member of the US House of Representatives. We reached her in Washington, DC. For more on this story, visit our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Piano]

Jo Cox comments

CH: Female MPs in the U.K. say they're afraid. And they have reason to be. Earlier today, a man was arrested outside the office of Labour MP Jess Phillips, after staffers said he attempted to smash the windows while shouting "fascist". That incident follows an incredibly heated day in the House of Commons yesterday. Labour MP Paula Sherriff critiqued Prime Minister Boris Johnson's repeated use of the term "surrender act" to describe legislation that would remove a no-deal Brexit from the table. She warned that that language might inflame potentially violent proponents of Brexit — and invoked the memory of her colleague Jo Cox, who was murdered in 2016.

SOUNDCLIP

PAULA SHERRIFF: I genuinely did not seek to stifle robust debate. But this evening, the Prime Minister has continually used pejorative language to describe an act of parliament passed by this House. And I’m sure that you would agree, Mr. Speaker, that we should not resort to using offensive, dangerous, or inflammatory language for legislation that we do not like. And we stand here, Mr. Speaker, under the shield of our departed friend. With many of us in this place subject to death threats and abuse every single day. And let me tell the prime minister that they often quote his words, “surrender act”, “betrayal’, “traitor”. And I for one am sick of it. We must moderate our language, and it has to come from the prime minister first. So I would be interested in hearing his opinion. He should be absolutely ashamed of himself.

[Much clapping and cheering]

BORIS JOHNSON: I think, Mr. Speaker. I have to tell you, Mr. Speaker, I have never heard such humbug in all my life.

CH: Needless to say, opposition MPs objected to the PM's use of "humbug" to describe their fears. Particularly when Boris Johnson went on to say that the best way to honour the memory of Jo Cox was to, quote "get Brexit done." Unquote. Ms. Cox was a "Remainer". And demands for an apology were swift. But when the PM spoke with the BBC today, he was typically unrepentant.

SOUNDCLIP

BJ: I totally deplore any threats to anybody, particularly female MPs. And a lot of work is being done to stop that, and to give people the security that they need. But I do think it's important that in the House of Commons, I should be able to talk about the surrender bill and the surrender act in the way that I did.

REPORTER: I question that language to.

BJ: Well, do you really? Because I think that's an important point. I think what that act would do is take away the power of the government — and power of this country — to decide how long it would remain in the EU, and give that power to the EU. That's really quite an extraordinary thing. So what we need to do is get on with the domestic agenda, and investing in police, in education, and in health. And that is what we’re going to do.

CH: British Prime Minister Boris Johnson — not apologizing for his comments about the late Labour MP Jo Cox.

[Music: Sombre]

Polish teen journal

Guest: Mitchell Schwarzer

CH: It's been called the counterpart to the diary of Anne Frank. Renia Spiegel began her journal in Poland in 1939, when she was just 15 years old. In it, she documented her life, her thoughts and feelings, before she was killed, just two months after her 18th birthday. Now, for the first time, all 700 pages of Renia Spiegel's journal have been published in English. The book includes her account of her first kiss with another teenager, Zygmunt Schwarzer — two days before the Germans declared war on the Soviet Union. Mitchell Schwarzer is the son of Zygmunt Schwarzer, who survived the Holocaust. We reached Mitchell in Oakland, California.

CO: Mitchell, what does it mean for you to see this diary finally available to English readers for the first time in its entirety?

MITCHEL SCHWARZER: Well, what it has done for me is it's shown me a completely new side of my father. He talked about war experiences. I interviewed him for a Holocaust research project in the 1980s. But I never knew about his life in Soviet-occupied, and then German-occupied Poland in the early 1940s the way I have since the diary came out. Because I get it through Renia, you know through her descriptions of him, and I get it through here the final writings that he does in the diary himself. He used to talk about how he survived you know Josef Mengele in Auschwitz. How he survived from typhus. You know, he would tell me these stories. but I didn't know the extent to which he tried to save other people.

CO: How does Renia Spiegel, how does she describe her love for your father?

MS: It's everywhere. I mean it's like a complete preoccupation for her. I think for her, he becomes this conduit to the outside world. Like, she's very inward. She's reflecting on herself and on her friends. And she's writing poetry. And yet, she's not really venturing out much. You know this is both under Soviet occupation and under German occupation. And he's the kind of outside world. He's going all around the town and into the environs securing food, making connections. So it's this very kind of intimate and tense relationship of two people who are somewhat different and yet linked very much.

CO: And it could be a love between any two people when they're young. But the backdrop being the advent of World War Two, and her, as you say, being caught between these two totalitarian regimes. Both of them threatening to her and there she is holding onto to the man who is your father.

MS: Yes, exactly. And things obviously got much worse in June 41, when the Germans arrived. And then things got much worse still in the summer of 1942, when the Germans established a ghetto in Przemyśl, which led to the events of her death, and my father's parents death.

CO: Can you read a passage of Renia's diary for us?

MS: Yes. This is from July 15^th, 1942, quote, remember this day. Remember it well. You will tell generations to come. Since 8 o'clock today, we have been shut away in the ghetto. I live here now. The world is separated from me, and I'm separated from the world. The days are terrible, and the nights are not at all better. Every day brings more casualties, and I keep praying to you, God Almighty, to let me kiss my dear mama.

CO: And that's from Renia. That's the worst of it.

MS: This is like two weeks before she dies, just roughly.

CO: How did she die?

MS: When the Germans established the ghetto in Przemyśl, My father knew that once the ghetto was established that's basically a holding pen a convenient holding pen — a convenient holding pen — so that the German SS can then round up Jews, and take them either to a massacre site in the forest, or to an extermination camp. And so once the ghetto was established, he realized it would be imperative to locate both his parents and Renia outside of the ghetto in hiding. And so he found a place for them outside of the ghetto in Przemyśl, which was the house of his uncle. He put them in an attic room above the apartment, a kind of hidden room. And yet, somebody within the next 24 to 48 hours made a report to the Germans that Jews are hiding in the building. And the SS came, found, them took them downstairs, and shot them on the street — three of them.

CO: The love of his life and his mother and father.

MS: Yes, all shot to death. And so for him, this was the bleakest moment. And if I could read one section from him?

CO: Please.

MS: This is July 29^th, 1942. I cannot describe everything that has gone on for the last three days. I have no energy for that after 12 hours of running around the city. These events have shaken me to my core, but they haven't broken me. I have a terribly difficult task. I have to save so many people without having any protection for myself, or any help from others. The burden rests on my shoulders alone.

CO: And that's him writing — your father writing — in Renia's diary that's now being published.

MS: That’s writing in Renia’s diary, and that's right when he had put them in the hiding now. And he doesn't know what's happened to them yet. But two days later, he's gonna find out.

CO: Your father survived Auschwitz. He went on to the United States. He was able to get hold of Renia's diary. What did it mean to him? Did he read it? Was it something that he connected to?

MS: Beyond all words, beyond all measure, yes. I don't remember it when I was a little kid. I remember it from the 1980s. So I was you know in my late 20s, early 30s. And I remember you, and I would go home to visit them, you know they lived on Long Island, New York. And my father had a medical office in his house. And he had these long examining tables downstairs. And he had a diary on both of them. You know, both tables were completely occupied by the diary. And he would just sit and read it and ruminate on it for hours and hours. And this went on for several years. You know when this was happening in the 80s, I didn't understand what was going on. And he didn't tell me a great deal because this was an earlier girlfriend, and my mother wasn't thrilled about that he had developed this obsession with a girlfriend. I didn't get a lot of details. And it took until me reading of the diary to realize oh my god, the diary is a whole window onto his life when he was in his late teens, before the worst things happened. But it describes his friend network. It describes his love, that describes Przemyśl at the time, dances they would go to. So I think it was a way for him, you know he was in his 60s by that point, it was a way for him to kind of relive parts of his youth before the door closed on his youth very abruptly.

CO: This journal of Renia Spiegel — 700 pages — now to be published in English, but also released in 13 different countries, and in a number of different languages. What do you think it will say to people beyond your family?

MS: I think what it does because it's so much about it's this alternation between the everyday like basic things that a 15 to 18-year-old girl would think about: my parents, my boyfriend, my friends, what's going on at school, who do I like, who do I not like. And yet, at the same time, every third or fourth entry, there is some hint of menace. And so I think what the diary says, and I think people will relate to it around the world, is that these kinds of menaces are not unique to the Holocaust. So I think it's a way to draw people into the fact that of human cruelty and possible possibilities of genocide. The fact that you have this alteration between everyday banality, and then overriding horrible menace.

CO: Well, Mitchel, it's absolutely fascinating, and just very dramatic. I really appreciate you telling us about it. Thank you.

MS: You're welcome. Thank you very much.

CO: Bye.

MS: Bye.

AH: Mitchell Schwarzer is the son of Zygmunt Schwarzer, who was the boyfriend of Renia Spiegel during World War Two. Ms. Spiegel's journal has just been published for the first time in English. And we've posted more about this story on our webpage at: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient]

FOA Boaty McBoatface

CH: For a brief, gloriously silly time, it was the ship that launched more than a hundred thousand cries for "Boaty McBoatface". Today, Prince William and Kate Middleton, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, christened the British polar research vessel the "RRS Sir David Attenborough" instead — after the historian and broadcaster. That new name holds firm against the tide — or flies in the Mcface, if you want — of popular opinion. In 2016, the Natural Environment Research Council — or NERC — held a national online poll in the UK. And if the results had been honoured, it would be a different story — and the boat would have a different name altogether. In April of that year, Carol spoke with Labour MP Louise Haigh — after the British science minister declared "Boaty McBoatface" an "unsuitable" moniker for the vessel.

CO: Ms. Haigh, no Boaty McBoatface? What do you think?

LOUISE HAIGH: [chuckle] Well, the NERC — who responsible for this boat — put the poll out. And they asked the British public what they'd like to call, and Boaty McBoatface won with a landslide majority. So I think once they put themselves out there to the public that, they should stick by their word, and they should do as the British public says. It's been an absolute Twitter storm. It's been all over that all our radio stations over the last couple of days. I think it's perfect. I think it's exactly what we've asked for. [CO chuckles] And I think people will want to follow its progress as well if they name it that. I think have a bit of fun with it. Let’s stick with it.

CO: The word is is that they're not going to. That despite the fact that they ask the public to come up with names, it looks like they're going to try and wiggle out of that.

LH: Yeah, so the conservative minister said today he didn't think it was likely to go ahead. This government doesn't have much of a sense of humour I'm afraid. But it doesn’t look like they are, which I think is a crying shame. It does beg the question as to what the point of the poll was is they're not going to listen to the results?

CO: Are you and the Labour Party going to stand up for the will of the people?

LH: [deep laughter] I certainly am, definitely. And I've seen a lot of my Labor colleagues are. I don't know, I can't speak, this isn't my frontbench portfolio. So I can't speak for that. But you know we're a democratic party, I'm sure we will stand on behalf of the public in this.

CO: Why do you think that so many people — 124 thousand of them of those who voted — and that’s four times more than the closest rival of a name, why do you think people did that? Why did they vote in favour of Boaty McBoatface?

LH: I think it's very typical British humour. Obviously, the power of social media has shown itself here. It wouldn't have been in the national news otherwise. It just shows how public imagination can be. I’ve seen on the BBC today as well that a racehorse in Australia has been named Horsey McHorseface in honour of it. So it genuinely is a global phenomenon now.

CH: From our archives, Carol speaking with Labour MP Louise Haigh in 2016 — after internet users voted overwhelmingly to name a British research polar vessel "Boaty McBoatface". Today, that vessel was officially christened the "Royal Research Vessel Sir David Attenborough".

[Music: Jazz]

Part three: Dental hygienist, Dallas trans attack

Dental hygienist

Guest: Alex Tanase

CH: Alex Tanase has lost his licence as a dental hygienist — because he cleaned his wife's teeth. The Ontario hygienist's troubles began several years ago after someone filed a complaint against him for treating his spouse. According to the province's professional body, it's considered misconduct if a hygienist has sexually abused a patient. Abuse, under the rules, includes any type of sexual relations. Even with a spouse. Now an Ontario court has upheld the College of Dental Hygienists' decision to revoke Mr. Tanase's licence. We reached Alex Tanase in Cambridge, Ontario.

CO: Alex, what are you facing now that this court has ruled that you can no longer practise?

ALEX TANASE: [deep sigh] I am facing ultimate devastation, and not being able to recover from it. I'm facing probably losing my house — because I don't know what I can work in a different field, and how much it will pay. I have an idea, and I know it's not going to be enough to support my family. And I'm forced not to work in dentistry anymore. Even you know let’s say I was offered a front desk admin position, or treatment care coordinator, or even working as an adjuster for an insurance company, because that means that I'm going to use my knowledge of dental hygiene.

CO: So you can't to have anything to do with dentistry?

AT: If it involves talking about teeth, or using my judgment about teeth, then yes.

CO: Okay, this is because as it as a dental hygienist, you cleaned your wife's teeth. Did you think you were doing anything wrong when you did that?

AT: Absolutely not. I acted under the impression that dental hygienist in Ontario were now allowed to provide care for their spouse — dental care.

CO You can't do dental work on a spouse because it's prohibited to have sexual relations with a patient, and that is considered to be sexual abuse. And so if you're married to somebody, you're probably having sexual relations, and so it's falls under that same law. Is that what happened to you?

AT: Yes, I was engaged to my wife at the time when I cleaned her teeth, and I continued to clean her teeth after we got married. So this falls under sexual abuse.

CO: Okay, but being accused of sexual abuse is a big deal in a profession. Why did you think it was okay? Did you not know that this was a restriction?

AT: I knew about the restriction, and I respected the restriction. Since I started dental hygiene school, I knew about this restriction. And I was told by a colleague that we got approved. And that's why I proceeded. I did not disrespect the law, or you know trying to break it. I have documented every single appointment. My colleague understood that that was the law passed by the government. When, in fact, it was just proposed by the college. So I made a mistake, and I wish I could turn back the hands of time and undo it. And not be judged as a lawbreaker, sexual abuser, and have to deal with this situation right now.

CO: How did it come about that it was discovered? How was it revealed?

AT: My wife was at the office, and she posted a photo saying that she's happy with her teeth, and happy with her hygienist, and happy with her dentist, and a friend of hers saw the photo and reported it.

CO: So there was a complaint?

AT: There was a complaint, yes.

CO: And then that means the college has to act if there’s a complaint?

AT: Yes.

CO: I understand she has as a bit of a phobia of the dentist chair, and that being with you, she was more relaxed, right?

AT: Yes. I get this from most of my patients, and I'm happy that I can provide care this way because I'm a big chicken myself. I don't like to sit in the chair as much as I like to be chairside.

CO: When you take this up with the college, when you say look, this was an honest mistake, the rule is going to change anyway, how do they respond? What do they say to you?

AT: I didn't proceed this way. Like, I didn’t argue the fact that the rule is going to change anyways. I apologize for what I did, and the whole situation, and for wasting their time. I ask for forgiveness, and this is where we are right now. There’s no mercy for me.

CO: How long has it been since you haven't been able to practice?

AT: I got the news that my license was revoked again on September 9th.

CO: And what have you been doing? How have you been making a living during the time that you have not been able to work as a hygienist?

AT: [deep sigh] This is very embarrassing because I'm always positive and cheerful, and I tried to apply for some jobs. I didn't get any response back yet. And we had to borrow money to pay our mortgage.

CO: Have you had any work?

AT: No, I didn't work. Whoever does the research can see what the allegations are. And I'm not afraid to to work anything. Last summer, I worked when they revoked my license for three months, I worked in a factory. And I packed bag of chips. I have to do what I have to do. But it's so hard to move from the situation I'm doing with.

CO: Because you've been you've been basically accused of sexual abuse for cleaning your wife's teeth?

AT: Yes.

CO: Do you have any sense that anyone in authority has recognized the impact that this has had on your life?

AT: The only people that recognized, [breaking down] and reached out, and extended love, and they shared prayers, and shared from their personal income from their families are people from social media, and friends, and family. I'm being called things that are outrageous. And nobody cares from the people that have this authority. I've been dealing with this for three years. I tried to go fight in court and explain. But I reached a point where I couldn't breathe anymore. I don't know what's gonna be.

CO: Alex, your story is out there. Hang in.

AT: Thank you.

CO: And thanks for telling it to us.

AT: Thank you, Carol.

CO: Take care. Bye-bye.

AT: Bye-bye.

CH: Alex Tanase is a dental hygienist who lost his licence for treating his wife. He was in Cambridge, Ontario.

[Music: Ambient]

Dallaire award

CH: It's been 25 years. But the horrors of the Rwandan genocide — and the world's failure to prevent it — are still with Romeo Dallaire. He was the Force Commander of the United Nations mission in Rwanda in 1994. He warned the UN about the pending bloodshed. As the massacre unfolded, Secretary-General Boutros-Boutros Gali ordered the withdrawal of all UN troops. But General Dallaire remained. Last night, the retired Lieutenant-General who served as Force Commander of the UN mission was awarded the Adrienne Clarkson Prize for Global Citizenship, at a ceremony in Toronto. And he spoke with Adrienne Clarkson about the moment he disobeyed the order to pull out.

SOUNDCLIP

ROMEO DALLAIRE: The answer came instinctively. And I think that's one of the great rewards of what this nation has inculcated in me is that it wasn't military tactics, wasn't the years of training as a soldier and so on. The answer came instinctively because it came from my schooling, the church, my communities, the society that put something in my gut that made me say no. And why I said no was because although the order was legal, and I then became a rogue commander, the order was immoral. Because we had at the time about 32,000 Rwandans in four sites, and one nation had pulled its force out before we were able to replace it with a few. And 4,000 people — just under 4,000 — were slaughtered in less than two hours. And so I knew that if we pulled out, those 32,000 there would have been slaughtered. And so I considered it to be immoral. But it was an instinctive answer. He wasn't the guy who'd like to get an answer no. He repeated it. I said no again. His chief of staff called back, and said you realize you've become a rogue commander? And I said yes, and I hung up. [everyone laughs] However, there was an ethical problem. The ethical problem was is that my troops could not follow a rogue commander. And so I had to go and ensure that each of them decided to stay with me knowing full well that I was a rogue commander, and they would be held accountable to that. But I considered no reward for that decision because it came from this society. It came from this nation. It was inculcated in me. And it spontaneously expressed itself. And I still say it was right. So that's how it happened.

ADRIENNE CLARKSON: Well, it was right. It may not have been legal in the in the terms of that, but it was right. And so few people can make those decisions. It's existential. That's the immediacy of it. And, of course, you know your actions brought consequences on yourself. And you were not able to help those 800,000 people, or nearly a million people who were slaughtered. Do you feel anger or resentment in a direct way with the people who were not willing to help? President Clinton, Boutros Ghali, heads of other European nations. Do you feel resentment to them? Do you think that they are to blame for this thing that happened which was hideous?

RD: Absolutely, and a few others. They took decisions. And those decisions had consequences. If you lead a world power, if you lead a nation that has the capability of preventing this, and you decide not to, then you are to be held accountable in history.

AC: What will their punishment be? Ever.

RD: Well, I hope they rot in Hell, but apart from that. [everyone laughs]

CH: That was General Romeo Dallaire, speaking with Adrienne Clarkson at an event in Toronto last night — where he was awarded the Adrienne Clarkson Prize for Global Citizenship.

[Music: Ambient]

Dallas Trans Attack

Guest: Stacey Monroe

CH: It's been another frightening week for the trans community in Dallas. The community has endured a series of violent attacks in recent months. And in the past two years, four trans women of colour have been killed. On Friday, a trans woman was shot several times in the chest and arm at a bus station. She's recovering in hospital, and her alleged shooter is now in custody. According to the arrest affidavit, he admitted to detectives that he shot the victim. And that he shouted derogatory slurs at her before he fired. Stacey Monroe is a community organizer and advocate in the trans community in Dallas, where she also sits on the police advisory board. That's where we reached her today.

CO: Stacey, can you tell us what happened on Friday at this bus station?

STACY MONROE: According to the details that I received from DPD, which is a Dallas police department, the victim, when she woke up on Sunday, describes a man approaching, and yelling slurs at her about her gender identity as a trans woman. And then shortly after, opened fire — doing extensive damage to the chest and arm area. And that's when she was later, after surgery, able to speak, which was Sunday.

CO: And she was able to give enough details that the police could identify this person?

SM: She was able to give enough details to where this happened. The suspect was arrested during a traffic stop. And, of course, they were already looking for this truck that was found on the video surveillance of where she was found. So you know detectives were already looking into this case, and investigating, of course, you know camera footage and whatnot in the area. And that's how they were able to determine and corroborate with the victim's story as to what happened.

CO: What do you make of the fact that he admitted to it?

SM: I'm glad that this is going through because this helps our community right now be a little bit more at ease. But we are demanding justice. We want something to be done. And we currently are at an aggravated assault charge, which is something that I'm still trying to understand myself to ensure that is this the appropriate charge? Does he need to be charged with attempted murder? Because that specifically is what it sounds like to me.

CO: This is, of course, not the first time that a trans woman has been attacked in Dallas is it? We did an interview back in June with a trans woman advocate for your community, who described what happened to Muhlaysia Booker, whose death was just one of a number of attacks at that time wasn't it?

SM: Correct. We have Muhlaysia Booker, and Chanel Lindsey, and then there was someone else who had been stabbed prior to that that was still an open investigation, and now recently with the recent victim this weekend.

CO: When we did interview in June, there was some speculation in the community as to whether or not there was a serial killer involved. It was maybe one shooter. Is it possible that this man who's been arrested might be responsible for other crimes against trans women?

SM: That is a little too early to speculate right now, and I don't want to cause any fear in the community. I don't think that. From my knowledge, and the details that I have some DPD, I haven't heard anything of that nature. However, I do ask all trans individuals to please notify their friends, family, someone, and let them know if they're going somewhere. Just so that we all know that you know we're okay, we're checking in when people, because that's what we need to do right now. This is this is the state that we're in right now. Ensuring that you know we are careful about who we are coming out to, even though sometimes you know we do ask people to be visible because that is the way that we affect change in the community is by being visible and being out there. But sometimes you know people deal with it in different ways, and it can affect different people. You know don't stop being visible. No, I encourage you to continue being visible. But just be safe about it. Be safe about who you're hanging out with. If you're meeting up someone in public, ensure that someone else knows about that. You know technology nowadays you can share locations on your devices and your phones, and it's just a simple check-in. It's creating these checks and balances to ensure that you know hey, if I'm going to go out and I'm going to be visible, and I'm going to be in the community, how do I take steps to make sure that I'm being safe with my life to ensure that I won't be killed? Whether that's carrying pepper spray, or mace, or a taser, something to just have on your body. And like I said, notifying your family and friends when you're going out. Because I hate to say that, but that is the climate and the state that we're in right now. This is what's going on in Dallas. And we need to take all these precautionary steps to ensure that we don't let it continue to happen in this city, and around the country.

CO: Are you confident that the police in Dallas are doing enough to investigate and to protect the trans women?

SM: I believe that more can be done. And that's something that I'm working on. So I've been in very close contact right now just with DPD trying to see how we can do better. And that starts with diversity training within the department. And then in the community as well, DPD needs to do something. If not DPD, as a community, we need to stand up and continue to educate our community so that things like this don't keep happening.

CO: When we interviewed the advocate for about black trans women back in June — this is Carmarion Anderson — one of the things she said was that because police don't maybe investigate this sufficiently, that it emboldens others. And the fact that this this man — the man who confessed to have shot this woman on Friday — does that that flow from that, do you think, that people feel that they can attack trans women with impunity?

SM: Yes, I feel in a way that you know I feel the only reason that the Dallas Police Department is putting a lot of pressure on these investigations to try to get a you know a solution to everything and get to the end of everything is only because of the national and international attention that we are receiving from the media because right now, the spotlight is on Dallas. So they're not just getting back into politics. Whether the chief of police wants to keep her position, and stuff so we start to put more resources into it. But what happens for the smart he says like before Muhlaysia Booker when that the person who was stabbed, have they had their resolve that case? You know making sure that it's not just the cases that are receiving the national and international media attention, but all cases need to be investigated with the same urgency as all other cases. And as you know our friends and families, and our allies, and everyone who says that they're an ally, we need to not just say that we're allies. We need to be intentional about it. Because being an ally is more than just saying hey, I'm an ally. You need to get up, and speak up, and defend trans individuals because we can't do it all alone.

CO: Stacy, stay safe, and thanks for speaking with us.

SM: Yeah. Thank you so much.

CO: Take care. Bye-bye.

SM: Bye-bye.

CH: Stacey Monroe is a community organizer and advocate in the trans community in Dallas, Texas.

[Music: Ambient]

FOA: CEO raises wages

CH: A few years ago, Dan Price bet big on a simple -- but kind of scary -- idea: he would dramatically cut his own salary to raise the minimum salaries of his workers. And his wager on increasing wages seems to have paid off. Because he's doing it again. Mr. Price is the CEO of a Seattle-based credit card company called Gravity Payments. It has just opened a new office in Boise, Idaho. And this week, Mr. Price announced that everyone who works there will earn at least seventy-thousand dollars by 2024. That's essentially the same promise he made to employees at the Seattle office back in 2015, when he spoke with As it Happens. He began by telling Carol about the anticipation he felt leading up to making the announcement to his staff.

SOUNDCLIP

DAN PRICE: Well, first of all, I was incredibly nervous. For the past two weeks before that, I had decided to do it. I hadn't done it yet. And every day, you know I was waking up, losing sleep, having nightmares thinking you know am I crazy? What am I doing? So I was glad to kind of get that burden off my shoulders. I was really nervous. And when I finally made the announcement, people just sat there in stunned silence. Several seconds went by before we all kind of erupted in screams and happiness.

CO: [laughs] How many people were in the meeting?

DP: So there's was about 120 folks that I work with at Gravity Payments, and probably about 65 or 70 were there in person.

CO: What are people making now? What was their salary before you announced this increase?

DP: Arguably, the most important people at the company are those that answer the phones every day when our clients need help, but they're also the lowest paid. So for those folks — and other positions like that — there were about 30 of them that will literally double their pay. They were making around thirty-five thousand dollars a year. There were 70 people that got a raise. And then 50 where it's not impacted directly. And you know there was a little bit of a concern about them in terms of fairness. But what I’ve heard from them is they're really excited that those that support them, and help them, the high-earners, high-achievers are going to be taken care of.

CO: And why seventy thousand dollars? How did you come up with that sum?

DP: There's a 2002 Princeton study that I read a long time ago, that I've been spending a lot of time thinking about, that basically said dollars up to 70 or 75,000 have a big impact on happiness because they alleviate emotional trauma that comes from not having enough. And dollars over that have very little impact — if any unhappiness. So since then, it was always my goal to get everyone in the company up to 75,000 thousand dollars. And I was pushing, pushing, pushing to help people develop themselves to get there. But it seemed like it was constantly a distraction that people had as they were pushing themselves to grow that it was hard to get by on the pay that they were making. So I wanted to remove that distraction, allow them to focus on helping our clients, which for the long-term will help them develop in their career.

CO: In what way? What do you know of your staff how their lives would be different — will be different — with this increase?

DP: So there is a gal that just works tirelessly, and is a very, very like phenomenal team member. And she was commuting 45 minutes each way to our office in Seattle because she couldn't afford to live near the office. There was another woman who was not able to move out from her parent’s house. She couldn't afford to make rent and have enough to do what she wanted to do on the pay that she was making. There was a woman who has a goal to be a homeowner by the time she’s 21 — very ambitious young single mother — and she thinks now she can make that. And perhaps one of the stories that got me the most emotional is there's a gentleman named Cody, and he and his wife have been holding off on having a baby because they couldn't afford it, and now they can start their family.

CO: I'm sure that the employees — those working for you — would agree with you and think this is great. What do other CEOs think of your decision?

DP: Well, that was a major risk because the constituents that I value most in my life are my clients, and they're all business owners, they're all CEOs. And so that was the biggest risk was that this would somehow put pressure on them, that would hurt our business, or offend them. And so I was concerned about that. I got some advice, and I decided to take a risk and go for it. And the response has been overwhelmingly positive. I've gotten hundreds of messages from other CEOs that say they support what I'm doing. Some are saying they're following suit. Some are saying they came up with their own program that's a little bit better or maybe not quite as generous, but what they can do. And I even got one from a young CEO that said I can't afford to give anyone on my staff a raise right now, but I'm going to work double time until I can, and I'm going to try to get them up to the same seventy thousand dollars that you can. And I’m going to work like crazy to get there.

CH: From our archives, that was the CEO of Gravity Payments, Dan Price. The Seattle-based company is expanding to Boise, Idaho — and Mr. Price announced this week that everyone at the new office will receive a salary of at least 70-thousand dollars — similar to a guarantee he made to staff at the Seattle headquarters four years ago.

[Music: Ambient]

Russia pyramids

CH: You know how it is: you miss a bill, and fall behind on your payments. Then, one day, you hear a voice outside your house telling everyone in your neighbourhood exactly what you owe. And when you open the curtains, you groan, "Oh, no, it's the giant talking pyramid!" You groan that in Russian, though. Because if there's a giant talking pyramid on your lawn, you live in the city of Samara, Russia. Where Samara Utility Systems has decided to shame people into paying their bills — by investing in a pyramid scheme. On the off-chance you're unfamiliar with shame-pyramids: they appear to be a little under five feet high; they weigh more than a metric tonne. If you owe Samara Utility Systems money, workers show up with heavy machinery and lower one onto your property. And they sound like this:

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: A voice speaks in Russian]

CH: Every ten minutes, that voice blares out of the pyramid, informing everyone in the vicinity of the exact amount you haven't paid. Not sure if it will work, but it definitely seems very inconvenient to be pyramided — especially if you're broke. Because then you're stuck with a huge loud object in your yard — and only money means no object.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

September 26, 2019 episode transcript

More Stories Like This