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 October 02, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Karen Gordon

CAROL OFF: Hello, I’m Carol Off.

KAREN GORDON: Good evening, I'm Karen Gordon. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

KG: Tonight:

CO: Getting away with murder. It's been one year since journalist Jamal Khashoggi was brutally killed — and our guest has a hard time believing the order didn't come from the Saudi crown prince.

KG: Voice-activated. A Los Angeles woman was sleeping outside on cardboard before she gave a solo singing performance in a subway — and now, she's fielding job offers and donations from awestruck fans.

CO: A calculating risk. After Andrew Scheer promises to save one-point-five billion dollars by cutting Canadian foreign aid to certain countries, our guest offers the Conservatives some domestic aid with their math.

KG: Bashing the bash. A booze-fueled party in London, Ontario, attracts thousands and creates chaos — and the mayor is especially disgusted by the ugly, misogynist signs made by students for the fake homecoming.

CO: His compliments to the shaft. After our interview about a pet-store robbery involving stolen pizzles — Which are, of course, dogs tog treats made from bull penises — one listener recalls how his co-workers at a meat-plant used those same items to tool around.

KG: And...shuffling off from buffaloes. A Utah hiker was stunned when his date was gored by a bison while visiting a state park, because only one other person has been gored in that park this year — and it was him.

KG: As It Happens, the Wednesday edition. Radio that figures he needs to stop getting up close and bisonal.

[Music: Theme]

Part one: Kashoggi baroness, Canadian foreign aid follow-up, bison gore

Kashoggi baroness

Guest: Helena Kennedy

KG: There is something haunting about Jamal Khashoggi's last published column with the Washington Post. He wrote, quote, "Arab governments have been given free rein to continue silencing the media at an increasing rate." Unquote. Days after writing those words, the Saudi Arabian dissident and newspaper columnist was silenced forever. Today marks one year since Jamal Khashoggi's death. He had entered the Saudi embassy in Istanbul to sign divorce papers. But Saudi agents were waiting — and they swiftly killed him. His remains were never found. Baroness Helena Kennedy is one of the few people who heard an audio recording of Mr. Khashoggi's death. The British barrister was part of a UN investigation into the killing. We reached her in London. And a warning: this interview contains disturbing details of the killing of Mr. Khashoggi.

CO: Baroness Kennedy, first of all, how are you reflecting on Jamal Khashoggi’s death one year after it happened?

HELENA KENNEDY: Well, it’s a very sad day. And I particularly feel for Hatice Cengiz, who is his fiancée. The absence of his body has meant that she still feels so unreconciled, and still hasn't been able to find some sort of completion.

CO: Saudi's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, as you probably know, he said this week that he takes full responsibility for the death of Mr. Kashoggi. But he denies that he personally ordered the killing or that he was involved in that part of the organization. What do you make of that claim?

HK: I really receive it with some skepticism. Going to Turkey with Agnes Callamard, the rapporteur who conducted the investigation, and who had sought my help as an expert in criminal law was quite a shocking experience. Because although I have many years of experience with really horrible cases, this was particularly grievous and shocking because of hearing someone actually being killed. And I don't think I'll ever forget the voice of a man who arrives at a meeting to pick up papers for a future marriage, and to make Salaams to people, and then to suddenly realize its’ turning into something much, much more frightening. That trajectory that — that shift in his own belief — is very present in his voice. And so listening to it was a really painful business. And so I find it very hard to accept, having heard the evidence, having heard the telephone calls organizing and arranging this, I cannot believe that this was not ordered at the highest level.

CO: The Saudis have long maintained that this was an interrogation that had gone wrong. It was a plan to take him back to Saudi Arabia, and things took a turn. What have you heard that leads you to believe that this was premeditated?

HK: Well, first of all, the Turkish intelligence agencies had not just a listening device of some form, which allows us to hear this man being killed. It also included some intercepted telephone calls in the four days before his death. And we do note on the 28th of September, Khashoggi went to the consulate to acquire papers of his divorce so that he could remarry. And that visit led to a number of calls. One from the consulate to Riyadh, asking whether they realize that Jamal Khashoggi had come to their consulate, and was he someone on the list basically being registered as if you like an enemy of the state or an enemy of the prince because, of course, he was a critic of the governments of Saudi Arabia. You hear other telephone calls between the consul general and senior people in Riyadh so that they could organize and plan a mission in Istanbul when it was known that Jamal Khashoggi would be returning to that consulate. Before the arrival of Jamal Khashoggi, you hear the pathologist, the medically-qualified man who is going to do the dismemberment, talking with the leader of this team about what is to take place, and complaining about having to do this on the ground, and saying that even a butcher gets to cut up a carcass hanging on a hook. You know, he was going to have to do it presumably on a plastic covered floor you know that they had brought with them — materials to deal with this. And they speak of Kashoggi as a sacrificial animal even before he arrived. And so we're not talking about somebody who's going to be kidnapped and just have a bit of chloroform put on his nose, and then taken away back to Riyadh. That was not what was being planned.

CO: What you have heard, and what you now know how the kingdom has responded, where does that leave this investigation that Ms. Callamard has been leading? What can you now do with this evidence?

HK: Well, Agnes Callamard: Has been incredibly courageous in taking this up. Because it was rather regrettable, in my mind, that there wasn't the high-level U.N. response to this at an early stage. And she's now asking that some sort of permanent standing institution is created under the umbrella of the United Nations to deal with extrajudicial killings of this sort. And to have the collaboration of nations who must also have intelligence relating to this crime.

CO: You know that in Saudi Arabia, there have been eleven people detained who the kingdom is saying are being held responsible for the death of Mr. Khashoggi. Do you have any confidence in the Saudi regime to actually prosecute this case?

HK: I have great concerns about whether there's due process. Requests were made by different legal organizations to have trial watching taking place — that they might be allowed to have observers. And that hasn't happened. A number of nations from the Security Council, you know: Britain, China, the United States have been allowed to have a person from the diplomatic mission was present. But as I understand it, they were asked to sign nondisclosure agreements. So I think there are a number of questions that the international community should be asking about this, even though it is claimed that a trial is taking place.

CO: You listened to a tape where there are chilling sections of some kind of a buzz, believed to be the saw that was used to cut up this poor man's body. At the same time, you know that outside the embassy, his fiancée was waiting, hopefully, to see him come out with the papers that would allow them to get married. How is she? What do you know about the state that she's in, and what she hopes out of all of this?

HK: I have seen Mr. Khashoggi’s Fiancée when she was in London. She made contact with me, and I met with her. And one of the very sad things was that she wanted to know for me whether he was really dead? Because when there is no body, people want to fantasize that the person might still be alive. She said is there any possibility that we may have taken him back, and he's festering in some Saudi jail? I'm afraid I have to say to I thought that was unlikely. So she has gone through hell, and I suspect it will be a hell that she will have to live with all her life. Because there is no doubt that she was someone who was looking forward to a really fulfilling future with Jamal Khashoggi, and loved him.

CO: Baroness Kennedy, I appreciate you taking us through all this. I know it's just horrific material to review. But I appreciate that. Thank you.

HK: Thank you, Carol.

KG: Baroness Helena Kennedy took part in a UN investigation into Jamal Khashoggi's death. It has been one year since the Saudi Arabian dissident and newspaper columnist was killed. Today, a memorial was held in Istanbul. Mr. Khashoggi's fiancée, Hatice Cengiz had this to say.

SOUNDCLIP

HATICE CENGIZ: Last year, today, I was standing here. I was a girl in love, waiting for my man to come out of the consulate. We wanted to go to dinner. We wanted to invite our friends to our wedding. Now, after the worst year in my life, I stand here broken, but proud. Proud to see you all here, and with you all, I still seek justice. I want to know what happened to his body. I want his friends to be released from jails. I want that those in power are held accountable for their actions.

KG: That was Hatice Cengiz, the fiancée of Jamal Khashoggi, speaking at a memorial today marking one year since his killing.

[Music: Sombre]

Canadian foreign aid follow-up

Guest: Aniket Bhushan

KG: Either we have a problem, or Andrew Scheer does. Yesterday the Conservative leader announced that, if elected, he would cut Canada's foreign aid budget by 25 per cent — by eliminating help for what he called, quote, "middle- and upper-income countries as well as hostile regimes," unquote. The total savings are supposed to be one-point-five billion dollars. But despite some help last night from the Conservative candidate and would-be foreign minister Erin O'Toole, we just couldn't quite make those numbers add up. Turns out we aren't alone. Aniket Bhushan is an adjunct professor at Carleton University's Norman Paterson School of International Affairs. We reached Professor Bhushan in Ottawa.

CO: Professor Bhushan, I know you have been running the numbers on the Conservative foreign aid announcement. What word would you use to describe the math?

ANIKET BHUSHAN: Puzzling, I would say if you asked me in one word.

CO: Why so?

AB: Well, because we've been trying to make sense of two characteristics that are latent in the announcement. In some respects, the announcement relates to a cutoff based on income levels in terms of Canadian aid recipients, and in some respects and some context, it's based on the Human Development Index. We've run the numbers using both, and we can't seem to square the reality with what is being presented.

CO: Okay, what they said, what Andrew Scheer said, and what we heard from Erin O'Toole last night, was that they're cutting 25 per cent of foreign aid spending. And the reduction will come from middle and upper-income countries, as well as hostile regimes — that's quote from the press release. So what does that mean? Where is that money coming from?

AB: It’s a very good question, and something that we've been puzzled about. Let me take the second part of that first. There is no internationally-accepted classification for a hostile regime. So I will leave that part of it. On the on the earlier part of so-called “middle-income countries”, Canadian foreign assistance has just crossed the six billion mark. So 25 per cent cut in that sense could yield you one-point-five billion. And coincidentally, when you look at the total amount of assistance that goes to the entire group of lower-middle-income and upper-middle-income countries, you arrive at about one-point-five billion. But I'd like to caution, and then maybe speak to which those countries are, and what that actually includes.

CO: Okay, so we heard is that when they give them the list, they say countries like Italy won't get funding, like Brazil. If they had to cut one-point-five billion, what countries would no longer get aid from Canada?

AB: So let me put it this way. There is no way, no commonsensical math way, no fiscal way no way, no plausible way that you get to one-point-five billion by cutting assistance to countries like so-called “Italy”, which was a one-off. “Argentina”. I think “Brazil” has been mentioned, and several others that have been mentioned. According to our analysis, if you take that point about cutting all assistance — and I mean all assistance without exception to all lower and upper-middle-income countries instantly taking it down to zero — that would mean you would have to cut all assistance to significant Canadian national security partners such as Syria — so all assistance to Syria, all the humanitarian assistance to Syria would have to be cut to get to that figure. All assistance to the likes of Pakistan, Iraq, Jordan, Nigeria would have to be cut to get to that figure. Also, in addition to that, cuts would also need to apply to the likes of Ghana, Ukraine, Vietnam, Colombia, Peru, and several others. That is the only way on an income cut off basis you can get to one-point-five billion. And I'm happy to speak also to the other alternative basis that has been suggested: using the Human Development Index.

CO: Okay, This is what he mentioned last night, this index that they said that this was the benchmark — the cut-off point — that they would use, this point-six per cent. What does that refer to, and where does that leave these countries?

AB: So point-six per cent is a point-six level. That's the level of the Human Development Index. Now for one, it is quite enlightened to be looking at factors beyond income. Income is an insufficient barometer of development, and human development is certainly a better barometer. But let me give you our math. So according to our analysis based on the most recent available official government of Canada figures, the maximum we can come up with if you were to set that threshold — that cut-off — at point-six in the HDI is one-point-one billion. So you cannot get to one-point-five billion using a point-six HDI cut-off. But I also want to underscore what are some of the other types of countries, what are some of the other countries that would be cut as a result? So, for instance, a country like Bangladesh is significant Canadian foreign assistance recipient for decades would be cut. It's above the point-six threshold, and received upwards of 130 million in assistance in 2018. And again, the likes of Iraq, as I mentioned Jordan, Lebanon, and even Ukraine, even though an exception I understand has been made in that case, would have to be cut because these are all above the point-six HDI threshold.

CO: And I want to point out that what you’re mentioning, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, countries that are hosting hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees. And then, of course, Bangladesh hosting the Rohingya Muslims, who are fleeing a genocidal regime in Myanmar. So these are the places where we've been concentrating. those would be cut under this policy?

AB: Absolutely. I mean Bangladesh is clearly above the point-six HDI level. So we've just extended our analysis and done one other thing, which is that I mean say if this were to happen, I think this is as you may surmise already infer that I don't think this is a particularly thoughtful policy plank. But even if we were to say this were maybe to happen if there was a government that comes in and is adamant about it. So what other countries would be potentially at risk at the rate at which they are developing? So essentially countries which are very close to that cut off. And so we find significant Canadian partners like Ghana, for example, upwards of 100 million in assistance in 2018, very, very close to that point-six cut-off — probably achieved that point-six level. Kenya, Myanmar, and even Tanzania, one of Canada's largest recipients historically you know since the start of Canadian assistance really is not that far away at point-five-three-eight from that cut-off. And you can imagine there are four or five year period or in the slightly longer period, it gets to that point-six level.

CO: We heard from Erin O'Toole last night that he said that this is a philosophical change. That's what he called it. What is this announcement then say about the Conservatives’ philosophy on foreign aid in your view?

AB: No, I would just take issue with the fact that there is any philosophy behind it. I don't think it is a philosophical change. I don't think it speaks at all to any philosophy. I just don't think it is even well thought through enough for it to be couched in those terms.

CO: We will leave it there. Professor Bhushan, thank you.

AB: Thank you.

KG: Aniket Bhushan is a an adjunct professor at Carleton University's Norman Paterson School of International Affairs. We reached him in Ottawa.

[Music: Piano]

Bison gore

Guest: Kyler Bourgeous

KG: Kyler Bourgeous loves the outdoors. And — because he lives in Utah — that means he's had his fair share of bison encounters, usually peaceful ones, the kind where you keep your distance and they keep theirs. But Mr. Bourgeous's relationship with bison has been a little...strained lately. In June, he became this year's first victim of a bison attack at Antelope Island State Park. Luckily, he recovered and went back to hiking. Then Kyler went back to Antelope Island with Kayleigh Davis on a date this past Friday. And she became Victim Number Two. We reached Kyler Bourgeous in Syracuse, Utah.

CO: Kyler, let's start with what happened to you back in June at Antelope Island. What was your encounter with a bison?

KYLER BOURGEOUS: So I was running up the Frary Peak Trail, which is a favourite trail of mine that I've done almost 150 times before. And because of the angle of the trail, I couldn't see the bison until I was way too close to them. I turned around immediately and started walking away. But I looked back and saw one of them was charging me right away.

CO: Yikes!

KB: There's no way I was going to outrun a bison [CO laughs]. It's like getting hit by a very precise car because they can weigh up to 2,000 pounds. They can go to like 35 to 40 miles an hour. And it's got sharp horns, so that hit pierced me in the armpit and hip and made a good-sized hole in my hip.

CO: Did it come back then after that?

KB: It moved off a bit and just stood on the side we're waiting to see if I was gonna move again. I was just kind of side glancing at it, you know watching it, but not moving too much [chuckling].

CO: Is that what you're supposed to do? [laugh] Just for our listeners who want to know what happens if you're gored by a bison. You just lay still?

KB: Yeah, don't give it any reason to think you're still a threat.

CO: But despite all that, and that encounter, you were anxious to get back out and get under the big sky again, I understand?

KB: I don't know if you've been to Utah, but it is a beautiful place. I would just pace my yard every day, and then started walking to the corner. It was only eleven days after where I went back hiking again. It hurt quite a bit, but I just like being outside too much to sit down. Going back to Antelope Island was a whole other deal. I waited a while on that one.

CO: But you didn't just go back to Antelope Island, you took a date. You had a young woman you just started to see. And how did you convince her that it was a good idea to go to Antelope Island?

KB: When I had called her Friday to go out there, she was already headed out there alone. She's also an avid hiker and likes to get outside as much as I do. So I didn't actually have to convince her, she’s just like oh, well let's meet up and go out then [chuckles]. I had just gone for a run up on a different trail, and she wanted to run. She's been training to do a half marathon. So she said she’d just go ahead and take off, and we had a designated spot we're gonna meet to watch the sunset. So I was probably about a quarter-mile behind her when her incident occurred.

CO: At what point did you realize or learn that something serious had happened to Kayleigh?

KB: There's a couple of small hills between us, and I see a bison pretty far off. So I just stood really far back watching, and I see the bison bluff charge. It was a scout troop, so it bluff-charged the scout leader, which I’d come to find out was actually helping her. She was laying on the ground next to that bison, but I couldn't see her in the grass there. He was distracting it, trying to get her get away from her. So I saw it charge him. Thankfully, it stopped short and didn't hit him too. So I start walking closer, and some of the scouts run back and ask if I'm Kyler? And there's a woman on the ground who got hit by the bison [slight chuckle].

CO: What went through your mind when you heard that Kayleigh had been had been hit by a bison?

KB: Panic. I dropped a few swear words. I remember clasping my mouth in disbelief. I hadn't even seen the impact yet, but just knowing that she got hit hurt my heart quite a bit. She got gored through her left hip. And she got a horn through her ankle and was launched about 15 feet in the air.

CO: [sigh] How is her recovery going? Is she okay?

KB: She is actually. It'll be about six weeks before she can walk on it properly, so she's able to get around with crutches.

CO: I presume she didn't do the half-marathon?

KB: No [CO and KB laugh].

CO: Kyler, you know that there've only been to bison attacks at Antelope Island State Park all this year. So are you taking this personally?

KB: It's kind of hard not to. And I'm often reminded that I'm probably cursed [CO and KB laugh again]. I know everybody kind of thinks that it was probably your fault if you got attacked by a bison. But you know we talked to the rangers, and they'll say it sounds like you didn't do anything, and there wasn't really anything you could do. It’s just a really unlucky accident.

CO: And will Kayleigh go out with you again?

KB: We have been hanging out still, yeah[CO and KB really like to laugh].

CO: Great, okay, so she doesn't think you're cursed then.

KB: No. And she was actually just asking me if I had extra bikes. So she wants me to take her biking once she's got that boot thing off her leg.

CO: Sounds like a date! [KB laughs] Kyler, I'm glad you're both okay.

KB: Thank you. I appreciate that.

CO: All right. Take care. Bye-bye.

KB: Bye.

KG: Kyler Bourgeous is a hiking enthusiast in Syracuse, Utah. He and Kayleigh Davis are both recovering from their bison injuries and plan to be back on the trails together soon.

[Music: Ambient]

LR: Bull penises

KG: It's tough for bulls to hear about, also tough for dogs to chew. You may have heard our interview yesterday with St. John's pet store owner Mark Winsor about pizzles — also known as dehydrated bull penis chews. Mr. Winsor said two thieves had broken into his store over the weekend, and taken off with hundreds of dollars' worth of pizzles. After that interview aired, we got a call from a listener who was a reminded of a time that he worked at a meat plant. Here's part of that call.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: A phone beep]

RAY BERNIER: Hello, As It Happens. My name is Ray Bernier. I live in Fisher Branch, Manitoba. And I just finished listening to your piece on bull penises, which takes me back to almost a lifetime ago. In the 70s, I worked at the Canada Packers plant in Winnipeg. And bull penises were popular. The guys would save them, dry them, and shape them into canes. So when some old guy at the plant would retire, at the retirement party, he’d be presented with a bull penis cane. [breaking into laughter] I didn't stay long enough to get one there. I left when I was still in my 20s. But yeah, that's what they used to do with bull penises back then.

KG: A listener reacting to our interview about dehydrated bull penis dog treats that were stolen from a St. John's pet store. Today, the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary said that a man and a woman had been arrested in connection with a stolen vehicle, and the Pet Zone theft. As always, you can reach out to us on Twitter and Facebook, both: @cbcasithappens. Our email is: aih@cbc.ca. And we always love to hear your voice — so give us a call at 416-205-5687.

[Music: Ambient]

Part two: Homeless singer, London homecoming

Homeless singer

Guests: Branimir Kvartuc, Emily Zamourka

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: A woman singing an aria]

KG: This aria greeted Los Angeles commuters while they were waiting for a subway late last week. The serenader was a homeless woman with pigtails, dressed in denim, carrying several tattered grocery bags and a cart. The video has become an international sensation. The singer's name is Emily Zamourka. She's since had offers of donation, jobs, and money to help get her off the street — including by a local Los Angeles councillor and his team. Branimir Kvartuc is thee communications director for Los Angelos councillor Joe Buscaino. We reached him and Ms. Zamourka in Los Angeles, California.

CO: Hi Emily, this is Carol.

EMILY ZAMOURKA: Hi.

CO: You're getting a lot of attention, aren't you? [laughing]

EZ: Oh, a lot of attention. Yes. Yes.

CO: Emily, why did you start to sing these arias in the subway?

EZ: Well, first of all, I love the aria. And also singing because I love to sing. And I never knew that somebody was going to get so much thrilled by that.

CO: But did you know that there was going to be that this one police officer was taking this video?

EZ: Never. I got on the wrong train, so I got out and I said well, I'm going to just wait here for my train. And so at that point, there were no people there — just a few all the way up the other end. So I was sitting, and I was singing.

CO: So this police officer was filming you because he wanted to capture this moment — this extraordinary moment — of you singing. And then what happened? He put that up for people to see, it went viral, as they say. And what response did you get after that?

EZ: Oh, like you just heard, it went viral [slight chuckle]. At first, you know I'm from Russia. I didn't know what viral even means. So sure, yes, I wasn't expecting all that. So yes, it was a surprise because not that I that I love music and I like I like to sing, you know? But it's just because I wasn't professionally-trained, and I was hesitating to perform it. I knew that subway would be so simple for me. And I also like the sound you know inside there you feel like you're on stage [chuckles].

CO: Because this got so much attention, this video that this man took of you. And then people wanted to know your story, and learned, in fact, you were homeless. How did that come to be? Because you've been performing for some time, and singing, how did you come to be living on the street?

EZ: [sigh] I started very well from the beginning when I arrived you all U.S. But when I became homeless, it was that everybody thinks that because of the violin. But yes, it's true that I lost the violin by someone stealing it from me and destroying it. But really you have a period of time of me working two jobs every day, every day. Something happened to me. I became very, very sick, and my illness was impossible to be treated. So my illness actually brought me first to become homeless.

CO: You mentioned your violin, and that is really key to it. You used to perform with your violin before you were singing as you are now. What happened to your violin? Tell us the story.

EZ: Everybody wants to hear what happened to the violin, you know? And I'm getting right down to it. It's just because I don't want to emphasize so much of becoming a homeless it wasn't because the violin was stolen. It's a part of it, but it's not because of only that. So I’m capable to perform any work, and I just could not stand the fact to just lay around, or sit around, or just do nothing, and just have help from the government. I decided to take my violin, get out, and perform on the streets. And one day, I was happily there, and someone decided to do such a bad thing that they did: they stole the violin from me and ran away with it. And two people were after to catch the person. That didn't do any good because he decided to throw it in the air and break it. And it's a tragedy. First, my illness, and then after that, you know I went bankrupt. And then, after that, I lost the violin, and it made it even worse. And that's when I actually lost it all — meaning the apartment, and the bills could not be paid.

CO: Emily, I'm so sorry. That's just awful all that should happen to you. And then this video ends up getting you this attention. And I know that the city is now trying to help you. I think that you're with someone from the Los Angeles City Council, who's helping you. That’s Branimir. Is he there with you?

EZ: Oh yeah.

BRANIMIR KVARTUC: I'm here. I’m right next to her.

CO: Hi, Branimir.

BK: Hi.

CO: How have you been able to help Emily?

BK: Well, originally, we in our office saw her performance before it even kind of became viral. And I passed it along to my boss, and to other staff members, and I said you guys, look at this. This is gonna be viral. And so we're having this giant grand opening of Little Italy this Saturday. And we thought oh my god like she's brilliant. Let's ask her if we can pay her, and have her come to perform and give her work. And so I personally contacted Emily. And she was thrilled, but we were thrilled even more than she was.

CO: Have you been able to help Emily get housing?

BK: So that was our next step. After we realized we're going to have this great performer, we thought Oh my god she's still living outside. So immediately that evening we made attempts to house her immediately that evening. In the process, we have aligned ourselves with a GoFundMe. That GoFundMe is nearly at 50,000 dollars. So what we're going to do is we're going to use that GoFundMe money to work with the Downtown Women's Center to get Emily housed as soon as possible. But really with that kind of money that is dedicated to her, she'll be living in her own apartment very, very soon.

CO: Emily, did you ever think that that one moment when you just decided to belt out that aria would change so much for you?

EZ: Never, ever in my life I have even dreamed about that — never. Well, I can take that back. I dreamed. But you see it's happening, so my dreams are coming true. I wanted to be a working artist, and I needed some support. I know that I could never do this by myself. And so I think this is the time when it came and it's helping me a lot with this. And yes, I am excited. And I’m ready to make it happen all the way.

CO: Emily, I wish you all the success with this performance, and as you launch — or re-launch — your musical career. Thank you for speaking with us. And Branimir, thank you as well.

EZ: Thank you.

BK: Thank you, anytime. Thank you so much.

CO: Bye.

BK: All right. Bye.

KG: Emily Zamourka is a woman who's singing at a subway station went viral. And Branimir Kvartuc is the communications director for the Los Angeles councillor, who is helping her get off the streets. We reached them in Los Angeles.

[Music: Ambient]

Viens response

KG: Quebec has failed in its duty to you. That's what Francois Legault admitted to the province's Indigenous citizens today. The Quebec Premier was in the National Assembly to officially apologize for the long history of racism imposed on Indigenous Quebeckers by the province and its employees. The apology is the first of more than a hundred recommendations made by the Viens Commission. The commission released its report on the province's relationship with its Indigenous residents earlier this week. But Premier Legault delivered his apology exclusively in French. That's neither the first nor the second language of many of the Indigenous leaders who had been invited to the National Assembly. That includes Verna Polson. She's the Grand Chief of the Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation Tribal Council.

SOUNDCLIP

VERNA POLSON: You got to understand there's also English-speaking First Nations in Quebec. So you know, and when I heard this all in French, you know it was kind of upsetting. But besides that, you know there's a lot of work. We've been ready for many, many years to work with the government. And now, this announcement today, we'll see how far it'll go. I'm hoping. I'm always hopeful that this will continue to work, open the doors, and the women, they need their justice. We're always going to talk about it. We're always going to push for it. Regardless of its being pushed aside, you know? because that's what it seems like for us as the women from Val-d’Or. So we always gotta keep that in our mind that we won't ever give up on them. And we will never give up on getting there fully justice that they deserve. So you know, this apology today, yes, that's a that's a beginning. But it should have been have done a long time ago. Because you know, we've been telling the government of what's been going on in our communities. What our people are faced with on a daily basis, and then had to take this to take place for Quebec and the government to listen to us. And that's how I feel as a leader. But you know, like I said, wwe've been always ready and working with the Quebec government. Now we'll see where is going to land from here.

KG: Verna Polson is the Grand Chief of the Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation Tribal Council. She was speaking to reporters in Quebec's National Assembly today.

[Music: Ambient]

London homecoming

Guest: Ed Holder

KG: The street party was completely unsanctioned — and, to a lot people, completely unacceptable. Last weekend, some 25-thousand partiers descended on London, Ontario for a notorious block party on Broughdale Avenue. It's been dubbed FOCO — Western University's annual fake homecoming. Police were out in force. There were 14 arrests, and 31 people were hospitalized. And London's mayor is also calling out the party-goers for messages printed on large bed sheets that hung from some houses — misogynist, sexually explicit messages. We reached Mayor Ed Holder in London, Ontario.

CO: Mayor Holder, how would you characterize the messages that were on these signs?

ED HOLDER: The messages that we're on the signs at the Broughdale event were messages of sexism, misogyny, and a rape culture. And you know they were on full display hanging out from several front patios on some houses in the Broughdale area.

CO: We're not going to repeat what these signs say.

EH: They're not worthy of repeating, Carol. I have to tell you that — absolutely not.

CO: But what can you possibly do about that? This is not the first time that such things have been posted during this party.

EH: And might I say as well that London is not unique to this kind of misogynistic rhetoric. It's in communities across the province and across the country — put out by immature and stupid people who either think this is funny or clever or what have you. And it's none of that, and absolutely unacceptable in my city. Here's the irony, it was not all that long ago that our own city council made a determination that as part of our upcoming four-year strategic plan, that we would put in a very specific strategic plan focus on creating a safe London for women and girls. And we're the first council in Canada to do this. And we hope that will be an example for others to consider. But more importantly, we have to do this ourselves.

CO: Right, but I wonder what you can do? Because these signs — as odious as they are — and as you say, they are misogynistic, they represent a rape culture. But do they break any laws?

EH: The answer is no, they did not break any laws. But you know what you can do, Carol? We can call them out for what they are. We can say you know you can't hide behind the shadows of bed sheets with stupid words on them. You call them out for what they are. Do you know what the irony is too? It was just last Sunday that hundreds of men — myself included — walked around Victoria Park in downtown London for a “Walk A Mile In Her Shoes”. That particular program is sponsored by a number of women's shelters across the country. And we all participated because it was our way to make a statement: enough.

CO: And you tweeted that as well. You said about this: we will not allow young women, be they students, faculty, or otherwise, to be disrespected. We will not allow London to be used as a doormat or a poster child for the ignorant messages that were on display over the weekend. But saying you're not going to be that. But these are these are educated young people, are they not? I mean so they know better than to do this. How can you possibly stop them? What can you possibly do to shut down this kind of offensive messaging?

EH: Well, firstly, that is not my definition of educated. I think they're dumb as hell these people that would purport to be well-educated, maybe unsophisticated. Just because they go to a great university that you and I have gone too doesn't make them educated. In fact, I think they're boors.

CO: All right, agreed [slight laugh].

EH: So one of the things that we're already doing is working with Western. Western has a very proactive approach in terms of dealing with this, as well. You know, until it gets to the point where people will not tolerate this kind of conduct, then that creates opportunities for it to proliferate. I'm looking at this; Western is looking at this, the police are looking at this, our women’s’ groups, and we're treating this seriously. But you know how much education does it take to know you don't do stupid. You don't do ignorant. And that's what this is. I mean one of the things that Western did in terms of our most recent non-homecoming event this past weekend is for the first time, they put in a code of conduct with academic sanctions if there were charges that were serious enough to be able to have those academic sanctions established on a student. It's a process. It's not an overnight fix. But as soon as you and I say, and Canadians, say Londoners say, it just doesn't work. It's unacceptable. That's the start. So we want to bring this from out of the shadows and into discussion.

CO: CBC’s London morning show with Rebecca Zandbergen, she went down to the neighbourhood to hear from students. I just want to let you hear one student's remarks about the party and the signs.

SOUNDCLIP

STUDENT: I personally wouldn't put up a sign like that, but I mean I can't speak to other people, so.

REBECCA ZANDBERGEN: Your reaction when you see that though, when you were out on the street?

STUDENT: You know, it happens, you're used to it. Everyone's used to it. Every school does stuff like that, so.

RZ: And what do you think about the guys that pose in front of this sign? I mean do you know any of these guys?

STUDENT: I don't. No, I don’t.

RZ: Does it turn you off a little bit?

STUDENT: A little bit, yeah, a little bit. But I mean I feel like it's just common here. So you know that's just something you have to get used to on the street.

CO: All right. There's a young woman who's saying you just have to get used to that. What do you make of that?

EH: You don't just have to get used to it. You have to say it's unacceptable. I mean ignorant doesn't even come close to what that kind of sign represents. But let me give you some comfort — and perhaps even your listeners — this is a few boors, who felt that somehow this would be somewhat interesting or clever. The response I've had from I will say hundreds now at this point since I tweeted this out — including a number of Western students — says this is not our Western. This is not our city. These people are not representative. And we will not allow the tyranny of this little minority to reflect on London, nor on Western University, which is a great school. And that's why I'm working with Western, and we've worked with western as a city. The great news is that our event over this past weekend had the least amount of injuries, least amount of arrests, no major injuries, no major arrests. That contrasts dramatically to last year. So am I optimistic? I have to be. That's our job.

CO: The images I've seen, police did really remarkable job, but you also had three hundred thousand dollars in police costs for an unofficial street party, 14 arrests, 62 tickets, 2,000 warnings, 31 people taken to hospital with non-serious injuries. Maybe you have a bigger problem than just the signs.

EH: Nothing is good or bad except by comparison. And I will tell you any injury is too many. Any arrest is too many. So let's take that as a given. But I will say to you when we contrast that to the prior year and the year before, it's moving in the right direction. I won’t to say this is a downward trend, but it's dramatically better. So I'll take that as much as it is, and be glad that there weren't major injuries. No one jumping off roofs and impaling themselves, and doing stupid things that when you have crowds and alcohol and the like that sometimes occur.

CO: If the young men who made these signs and hung them outside on these bedsheets outside of these houses, if you could speak to them directly, if you could say one thing to them, what would it be?

EH: Grow up. Would your mother be proud of you for doing that? Would your sister be proud of you? Are you kidding me? You didn't come to Western to be an idiot, and that's what you're showing. If there’s salvation, I suppose it would be if you had a chance to reconsider your option. And if the person had a different had a different consideration, frankly he is not welcome in my city.

CO: Mayor Holder, thank you.

EH: Carol, I appreciate this as well.

KG: Ed Holder is the mayor of London, Ontario

[Music: Horns]

Smart garbage can

KG: The late industrial designer Charles Harrison wasn't an inventor so much as a re-inventor. Over his long career, he perfected the portable hair dryer, the riding lawnmower, and the cordless razor, among dozens of other products. But the reinvention that filled Mr. Harrison with pride was one we fill with junk: the plastic garbage can, in 1963. "No more clang-clang of metal before breakfast," he once wrote. Plus, and this is major: he added wheels. It wasn't fancy, and it wasn't high-tech, but it changed our lives. Now, all we had to do was the bare minimum: fill it with garbage, and roll it quietly to the curb. But that bare minimum may get even barer — almost totally naked, in fact. That is, if the SmartCan delivers on its promise of rolling itself quietly to the curb. Now, this would mean going through the fairly absurd process of connecting your garbage can to an app. But once you've done that — and installed a docking station wherever your garbage is picked up — you'll be able to program your SmartCan to drive itself out once a week, or two weeks, or whenever. It's still in the development stage. So for now, we still have to do the gruelling task of using our own dumb muscles to take out a can full of stuff we don't even want. Although I guess it's fair that we have to exert ourselves slightly to dispose of our own garbage. Maybe Charles Harrison's innovation was the last garbage-can innovation we really needed. It's sturdy, utilitarian, and it doesn't break down. And it may not be a high-tech party, but it still invites you to roll out the barrel.

[Music: World music]

Part three: Zimbabwe water, Safe Third Countries

U of T suicides

KG: Universities are stressful and competitive environments. That's inevitable, to some extent. But to what extent, exactly, is a topic of increasingly hot debate at Canada's biggest university: the University of Toronto. Yesterday, we spoke with a student who lost a friend to suicide earlier this year. And he shared his outrage in the wake of yet another student death on Friday. Now, U of T is installing temporary safety barriers inside a computer science building where three students have killed themselves in the last eighteen months. A lot of people think that should have happened sooner. And this morning, University President Meric Gertler addressed those criticisms in an interview with CBC Toronto's Matt Galloway.

SOUNDCLIP

MERIC GERTLER: We all wish we had done more sooner, but let me tell you about the other things that we have been doing. You know many people have pointed to the mental health services within the university and the need for us to improve those. And we heard them very loudly and clearly. So immediately in the spring, for exam period in April, we introduced new drop-in counselling at Robarts Library during exam period — with counselling available in six languages. And you know we are looking at many different aspects of this. You know people have talked about, for example, the culture of competitiveness at a university like the University of Toronto — something which is a fact of life. But you know we've been looking at our current practices to see how we can indeed change that. So after the tragic event in March, our computer science students union organized a town hall to talk about sources of stress, and particularly competition that students face in moving from first-year computer science to second year. And I'm happy to say that as a result of those consultations, big changes are being made so that we now expect that the vast majority of first-year students in computer science will indeed progressed successfully to a second year. So that is precisely the issue that we are now addressing.

MATT GALLOWAY: You said you said that it was a fact of life. That kind of competition on a campus like this is a fact of life. What does that mean?

MGE: Well, I think you know at a university like the University of Toronto, which has very high standards, people indeed are selected because of their academic performance. We select for other characteristics as well. But it is indeed a kind of intense academic experience. And it serves our students well. I have to say that, for example, when we survey employers around the world every year, we don't do this, but there are a couple of agencies that do this, they report that graduates of the University of Toronto are ranked 12th in the world in terms of their employability. So the quality of the education that they're getting and the experience that they're getting is serving them well.

KG: U of T President Meric Gertler, speaking with CBC Toronto's Matt Galloway this morning. Four students have taken their own lives on U ot T campus in the past 18 months.

[Music: Sombre]

Zimbabwe water shortage

Guest: Linda Masarira-Kaingidza

CH: Think of it as a cash and flow problem. Last month, city councillors in Harare, Zimbabwe shut off their main water plant, blaming a lack of foreign currency needed to import treatment chemicals. Today, the water is back on, after the national government stepped in. But according to many, the latest stoppage is just a drop in the bucket — following an especially harsh drought, and the country's ongoing economic crisis. Linda Masarira-Kaingidza is a labour activist and politician with Zimbabwe's LEAD party. We reached her in Harare.

CO: Linda, what did it take for you and your family to get water today?

LINDA MASARIRA-KAINGIDZA: Actually, we got water last night. We now go and fetch water around 10:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. every night because there will no queues at the boreholes. So every night when I get home, I have to make sure that we go and fetch water in our 20 buckets to last us for the next 24 hours.

CO: So how many buckets are you taking with you?

LMK: Twenty buckets a day. Twenty-litre buckets. Because I've got a family that has got eight people, so we'd need that much water, and we've got a baby in the house.

CO: And you're doing that every day. Every night you're trying to get that much water?

LMK: We've been doing that for the past two months, every night.

CO: How far do you have to walk to the borehole?

LMK: The borehole for my house is about two kilometres away. So I actually have to drive to go there. And then those we do not have vehicles, they use wheelbarrows, some actually have to hire trucks that they use to carry their buckets of water. And then for those who are elite enough, they are having to buy water for their water tanks. But it is now more expensive. Five thousand litres of water costs about $100 USD and that is not sustainable.

CO: And, of course, we know what happened this week, which is that the Council closed the treatment plant because they couldn't buy the chemicals needed to treat the water. And that created all kinds of other problems. What was that like when the Morton Jaffray Treatment Plant was actually shut?

LMK: The situation was deplorable. Children have to go to schools, and they have to use toilets with no water. Hospitals had no water. Pregnant women had to carry buckets of water into the labour ward. With no water, no one could actually give birth because the nurses would say we do not have wanted to attend to. That is how bad the situation was.

CO: But we heard that the central government has said that that the Harare city council is corrupt, and it has mismanagement. It says the council is not doing its job, and that the central government can't do anything, can’t bail out your city. What do you say to that?

LMK: I concur with the local government. The blame solely lies on Harare city council for misappropriation of funds. Their salaries are way too high. This is an issue that needs Zimbabweans to be able to come out in their numbers and call Harare city council councillors to account on the way they are failing to buy chemicals for water treatment — because the mandate to treat the water and to supply water to Harare residents solely lies with Harare city council.

CO: But finger-pointing at this point and trying to find out who's done wrong here doesn't help all of you people in Harare who are having this water crisis. There was a cholera crisis that killed 26 people just last year. So what public health concerns are you faced with at this point?

LMK: The public health concerns that we have is a looming cholera and typhoid outbreak. And Zimbabwe hospitals don't even have the capacity to cap a cholera or typhoid outbreak at the moment considering that our hospitals have got no drugs, and doctors are on strike. And I think the local government did well through the Ministry of Finance by availing funds to ensure that procurement of chemicals to treat water is available. That was critically important to Harare residents.

CO: This crisis of water is just added to all the other things that Zimbabweans are going through. The problems follow years of mismanagement under the government of Robert Mugabe. There were great expectations that with the new president, Emmerson Mnangagwa, that things would improve. He promised that things were going to get better. That they're on a journey of reform, his government says. Are you seeing any evidence of that?

LMK: When I look at Emmerson Mnangagwa’s government, I think it is much better than Robert Mugabe's government in terms of trying to reform, and trying to create democratic spaces. The economy is what still looks like a mammoth task for them to fix. It's more of a political contestation where when the elephants fight the people suffer. This is a situation that we have in Zimbabwe which has to be untangled. And that can only be done when the citizens themselves turn up and say to the politicians enough is enough because the people of Zimbabwe are suffering.

CO: Linda, I hope that this situation gets better for you. It sounds just appalling. And I appreciate you speaking with us. Thank you.

LMK: You're welcome, Carol. Thank you very much.

CO: Goodnight.

LMK: Night.

CH: Linda Masarira-Kaingidza is a labor activist & politician with Zimbabwe's LEAD party. We reached her in Harare.

[Music: Jazzy guitar]

Labour MP harassment

KG: "Vile, unconscionable and despicable." That's how British House of Commons speaker John Bercow characterized a campaign against Labour MP Stella Creasy. Ms. Creasy has been advocating for changes to abortion law in Northern Ireland — where abortion remains illegal except in very limited cases. And she's been doing so while pregnant herself. Something her opponents have sought to exploit.

SOUNDCLIP

STELLY CREASY: For the last six days, an organization calling itself the Centre for Bioethical Reform UK has been waging a campaign of intimidation and harassment against myself, and by extension my constituents in Walthamstow. From turning up in our town centre with a 20-foot banner of my head next to an image of a dead baby of about the age of the baby I'm currently carrying myself, proclaiming that I am working hard to achieve such an outcome. To buying from Clear Channel Billboards, advertising in my constituency displaying graphic and scientifically incorrect pictures of fetuses near to schools. To libeling me on national radio as someone who wishes to see abortion up to birth. To their “Stop Stella” campaign, which explicitly encourages people to target me as a hypocrite for being pregnant, and advocating for the rights of all women to choose when to be.

[Sound: Many MPs proclaim this to be shameful]

SC: Walthamstow residents have made clear their distress at this behaviour. So have I. And that they've made their point, and they disagree with me, and I understand that, and ask them not to continue. Despite this, they've already stated they will keep returning and targeting me until I stop campaigning. Already, I've received numerous threats and abusive messages, which directly quote their material.

KG: Labour MP Stella Creasy speaking in the UK House of Commons today about a campaign targeting her over her views on abortion. Ms. Creasy said she's sought police and parliamentary assistance to deal with the harassment she's facing and has received none. And House Speaker John Bercow said he hopes more will be done to support her.

SOUNDCLIP

JOHN BERCOW: There is a major difference, and it is important that we should be clear about this, between putting a point of view with considerable force and insistence on the matter of abortion or any other matter of public dispute on the one hand, and putting it in extreme and provocative terms. And in doing so, saying we will go on doing so until you stop exercising your right as a Member of Parliament to campaign for what you want. Give in to our intimidation, our threats, and our bullying. Or it will be the worse for you.

KG: That's House of Commons speaker, John Bercow, speaking earlier today. MPs from across the aisle have come together in Stella Creasy's defence — in a rare moment of cross-partisan solidarity these days. Among them is Conservative MP Maria Caulfield, who said campaigners against Ms. Creasy, quote, "do not speak for those of us who may have a differing view on the abortion debate." Unquote.

[Music: Ambient]

FOA: UFO coin

KG: It's silver, oblong and flat, and it glows in the dark. And you'll be lucky if you can see one for yourself — because the coin has been spinning off the shelves at the Royal Canadian Mint since it went on sale yesterday. On the face of it, it sounds a lot like the flying saucer depicted on its face: the one that many — including the Canadian government — said crashed into the waters off of Shag Harbour, Nova Scotia more than fifty years ago. What exactly happened around midnight on October 4th, 1967 off the province's southwestern shores has never been fully explained. But it was officially documented by the federal government as a UFO crash. And it's still considered one of the best-documented of such phenomena in the world. But Chris Styles doesn't need to see official evidence to believe what he saw with his own eyes. What he witnessed that night inspired him to become a UFO researcher. Here's some of what he shared about the incident with former As it Happens host Mary Lou Finlay back in 2003, From our Archives.

SOUNDCLIP

CHRIS STYLES: I was in darkness on the night of October the 4^th, 1967. What I saw was different than most other people that night, and what's become known as “The Night of the UFOs”. What I saw was a sphere — a featureless orange sphere — that hovered over the water of Halifax Harbour, tracing the shore line, perhaps 60 feet or so through, and orange — the colour a poker would be when it just glows in a fire. And no features, no sound.

MARY LOU FINLAY: What did other people see?

CS: Well, other people did see what I saw, and they reported that to the press. But all over the province in Nova Scotia — particularly from the metro area down to the south western tip — people were reporting UFO sightings for many of the communities Mahone Bay, Lunenburg, off the coast on draggers that were fishing. And, of course, in Shag Harbour, and that case came to eclipse the others. In Shag Harbour, what people saw was an object that was at least 60 feet in one dimension. It had four lights spaced 15 feet across that flashed sequentially. It tilted to an angle and hit the water surface, producing the sound of an explosion and a bright flash. It left a trail of foam on the water half-mile long, 80 feet wide. And there was an extensive underwater search conducted by the Navy.

MLF: Was there?

CS: Oh yes, yes. For at least five days. The reason is, you see, there were there were just dozens of witnesses in the area — including three RCMP officers on duty. So they were like trained observers.

MLF: So were there any photographs?

CS: No. It happened near midnight on a Wednesday night.

MLF: Yeah.

CS: In a fishing village with no moon out that night. And nobody was running around with a camera. After the occurrence, you see, several people called the nearby RCMP detachment. Interestingly enough, nobody reported a UFO. People simply called in to say they thought an aircraft crashed in the harbour.

MLF: Right.

CS: Or they'd seen lights. Concerns were for survivors. And it's interesting because there's a number of these crash claims scenarios in the world. But this is the only one that supported and that interpretation by government documents. And they're freely available from National Archives and DSD headquarters. They say quite clearly the Government believed it was looking for a UFO. There was no downed aircrafts. In fact, as I pointed out, no one reported a UFO. It was the officials that started calling it that. There was nothing in 1967 that was both aerodynamic and hydrodynamic, and there still isn't in our technology. So it's a strong case for that premise.

KG: From our Archives, UFO researcher — and witness — Chris Styles, speaking to our former host, Mary Lou Finlay, about the mass sighting of a UFO over Shag Harbour, Nova Scotia. Yesterday, the Royal Canadian Mint issued coins commemorating the famous 1967 incident. They've already sold out.

[Music: Ambient]

Safe Third Countries

Guest: Ursela Ojeda

KG: President Trump has made it clear that he wants to cut down the number of people fleeing to the United States. And it hasn't just been angry tweets: his administration has been piling policy on policy to deter people from crossing the American border. In the latest move, asylum seekers travelling to the U.S. will have to seek protection in El Salvador, Guatemala or Honduras first. These agreements are similar to "safe third country" deals — like the U.S. has with Canada. But migrant advocates are really stuck on that word — safe. Ursela Ojeda is a policy advisor with the Migrant Rights and Justice program with the Women Refugee Commission. We reached her in Washington.

CO: Ms. Ojeda, can you tell us why you believe that these countries: El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras would not be safe for asylum seekers to be turned back to?

URSELA OJEDA: It's absolutely ridiculous for the United States to be asserting in any way that Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras are safe for refugees to be returned to. These are countries that are sources themselves of people fleeing persecution and coming to the United States for protection. They are countries where there are significant rates of impunity, of violence, of femicide and violence against women. None of these countries have developed asylum processes. The last information we have is that Guatemala has eight full-time asylum staffers. And El Salvador has just one. So there's just no way that they're going to be able to provide full and fair assessments for people requesting protection there.

CO: Now, what we're hearing from the Trump administration is that they are working with these countries to develop better infrastructure to assist with asylum seekers that would be part of the asylum cooperation agreement. And that they believe that they can get them to a higher standard of dealing with asylum seekers. What do you make of those arguments?

UO: I think it's an absolutely important thing to be working to improve the protection mechanisms of all of these countries in the region. This is a regional refugee flow, not just a local one. So that's a very valiant effort. But it needs to come at the same time with attempts to tackle the root causes that are pushing people to flee these countries themselves and flee to the United States. We need to tackle poverty. We need to tackle violence. And we need to combat corruption in these countries to protect people where they are and promote sustainable economic development.

CO: Can you just go through what would happen to someone who is leaving let’s say El Salvador who can't stay there or is fearing for their lives? Maybe just describe what that person or family would do, where they would go, and what would happen to them along the way — given the new restrictions?

UO: So a family who's fleeing harm from El Salvador would likely transit at least through Guatemala and Mexico if they were coming to the United States to seek protection. And I do want to point out not all families, not all people fleeing El Salvador and the other Central American countries are coming only to the United States. Others go to Costa Rica, to Panama, to other locations where they will be safe. So if this family comes up through Mexico, through Guatemala to the United States, and they arrive at the U.S. southern border, under these agreements and under several other roadblocks that the government has put in place, it will be virtually impossible for them to access asylum and access protection in the U.S.

CO: Right, so but just basically what happens to this family? Let's say that they have left El Salvador and they don't feel safe. Why couldn't they stay in another country? Why couldn't they stay in Mexico or Honduras? Why would they keep going?

UO: So many families keep going because the borders between many of these Central American countries, between Guatemala and Mexico, between Honduras and El Salvador are quite porous. So that means that this family's persecuted the harm that they are fleeing could follow them to another country, and they may not be safe staying where they are.

CO: And we know that there are approximately 42,000 people who have been turned back to Mexico recently, who have to stay in Mexico while their asylum claim is being processed, is that right?

UO: Yes, you're referring to the remain in Mexico policy.

CO: Yes.

UO: That's perversely called the “Migration Protection Protocols”. I think over 50,000 people now have been returned to Mexico to wait for their proceedings in the United States. And these people themselves though they have already entered the United States and begun their processing are also going to run into roadblocks in accessing protection, in accessing asylum in the U.S. And that's because of another thing that the U.S. administration has done. We call it “Asylum Ban 2.0.” This is a federal regulation to make anyone who transited through a third country by land to the southern border of the United States ineligible for asylum if they didn't first seek protection in the country they travelled through. So these families that are in Mexico — the 50,000 people who are part of MPP, or remain in Mexico — and who travel months ago to get to the United States may find themselves suddenly ineligible because of this new change in regulation.

CO: Oaky, so those are just some of the roadblocks that are in the way. But going back to the three countries which have now signed on to this, why would they? Why did these Central American countries agree to these deals with the United State?

UO: I think it's a very difficult position for these Central American countries to be in in that the United States has made significant threats — particularly in the case of Guatemala — to either block remittances or to impose tariffs against these countries if they don't comply with the United States request to quash the number of people coming up north.

CO: But are they getting any funding? Would that be a motivating factor?

UO: So the agreements themselves are very complex, and I have to admit that I haven't even seen the text of the agreement between Honduras and the United States. But the agreements are quite complex and cover multiple things — including: providing support for the asylum systems in those countries, providing support in the case of El Salvador for the creation of a Salvadoran Border Patrol if you will. So there are certainly sweeteners we could call them in the agreements to get the countries to agree. The United States is mostly just forcing these countries to do its bidding.

CO: Now, the objective of the United States is to deal with all the people who are coming over the border into the southern United States. That's what President Trump would like to stop or to slow down. Isn't he doing that? Is he accomplishing what he wants to do here?

UO: In a very sick twisted sense of that, yes. What the United States is doing is cutting off access to protection for people that desperately need it. This means that vulnerable individuals who are fleeing their countries fleeing for their lives are at risk. They may be returned to places where their lives and safety are in danger. It's really just, again and again, a cruel way of locking people who are seeking refuge rather than focusing on real solutions that would restore order, decrease flows, and uphold our refugee laws and values. Instead, what we are doing is forcing these families to stay in a place that is essentially a burning building, locking the door, and throwing away the key. And for the families that escape, they're being thrown back into the window into the burning building.

CO: Ms. Ojeda, I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you. Thank you so much.

KG: Ursela Ojeda is a policy advisor with the Migrant Rights and Justice program with the Women Refugee Commission. We reached her in Washington.

[Music: Ambient]

Speech pauses

KG: Well...it's a trade-off. On the one hand you think I'm smart. But on the other hand...you don't think I think I'm smart. This is the new, and not super-helpful, science on the subject of...pauses. Specifically, what effect it has on people when, instead of just barreling through your remarks, you take moments once in a while to stop and think or gaze meaningfully into space. In a study published in the journal Lingua, Erik Schleef of the University of Salzburg revealed his findings on what he calls "unfilled pauses". There's good news... and bad news. The good news is that the subjects of Mr. Schleef's study found speakers who paused to be more "articulate" and "educated". That's a helpful tip, if you need to fake your way through a work presentation you completely forgot about. Try saying "Our first-quarter results are good or bad depending on which they are." The problem is — and this is the bad news — the study subjects also said that unfilled pauses made the speaker seem "less assertive" and "[less] confident". I mean, come on, Mr. Schleef. You just shared a new strategy for seeming intelligent, and then told us it also makes us seem hesitant and uncertain. You gave us pauses and then you gave us pause.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

October 02, 2019 episode transcript

More Stories Like This