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 10, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Tom Allen

CAROL OFF: Hello, I'm Carol Off.

TOM ALLEN: Good evening. I'm Tom Allen. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

TA: Tonight:

CO: One nation under "God, no." U.S. President Donald Trump is refusing to cooperate with an impeachment investigation — and a Republican lawyer is stunned by his stonewalling.

TA: It smells even fishier than it sounds. Nearly two million dead salmon have been rotting in the middle of a Newfoundland bay for weeks — and even with a cleanup, our guest wants a government inquiry.

CO: Return to dissenter. After a skipped year, the Nobel committee awards its 2018 Prize for Literature to Polish novelist Olga Tokarczuk — whose win will not be celebrated by the Polish government.

TA: An awkward stage. The kids who love the YouTube children's entertainer "Blippi" are upset that a different actor will play the character in live shows — but their parents, who already bought tickets, are livid.

CO: Axing for trouble. In a rare case of sensitivity, Atlanta Braves fans didn't do their "tomahawk chop" during last night's game — and after they were eliminated from the playoffs, some baseball fans are blaming — the lack of tomahawk chops.

TA: And...the road to hell wasn't paved at all. When a logging road gave out, 90-year-old driver Paul Jones was trapped for three chilly days with just a jar of cashews, inside a dangerously unstable vehicle.

TA: As It Happens, the Thursday edition. Radio that's sure he was glad to get his hands on some cold, hard cash..ews.

[Music: Theme]

Part one: Impeachment update, Nobel Prize literature winner, stuck on logging road

Impeachment update

Guest: Gregg Nunziata

TA: One president had plenty to say today about the events at the centre of the impeachment inquiry. It was not Donald Trump. It was Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky. He spoke to reporters in Kiev at length. And he reiterated his contention that, during his July call with the U.S. president, there was no pressure or blackmail. President Trump, on the other hand, has spent much of the week trying to ensure that no one talks to those conducting the House impeachment inquiry. First, he blocked his EU ambassador, Gordon Sondland, from testifying. Then the White House sent a letter stating that the president would not cooperate in any way with the investigation. Gregg Nunziata called that letter "bananas." He's a lawyer who's worked for the Republicans. We reached him in Washington, D.C.

CO: Gregg, why did you call this letter from the White House counsel “bananas”?

GERGG NUNZIATA: Well, it's a remarkable document, really. I mean, it's at root a very political, confrontational letter — which is not the sort of thing you expect to see coming from the lawyers in the White House counsel's office. It asserts a number of legally-shaky claims to try to entirely delegitimize Congress's constitutional role in oversight and investigations.

CO: It argues though that this impeachment inquiry is constitutionally illegitimate. Is there any substance to that?

GN: This just not. And certainly our system doesn't give the executive the power to unilaterally evaluate the merits of an investigation and shut one down. There's nothing constitutionally illegitimate about the process being followed by the House. Now the White House may believe there's no basis for impeaching and removing the president. That the charges are meritless, that they're politically motivated, that's all well within their rights to argue. But they can't argue that there's a constitutional problem with the House's authority to conduct this investigation.

CO: But as you point out at the beginning, it's quite political. I mean, isn't that the point? It's not really a legal letter, it's a political letter, isn't it?

GN: Well, it is. But it's unusual that it would come from the lawyers in the White House. Typically what would be happening historically is that the lawyers would be asserting well-grounded, privileged arguments about information they believe should be protected from congressional review. And that would be litigated in court or negotiated with the lawyers for Congress. Typically the kind of hot-blooded language and hyperbole even in this letter would be coming from the political arm of the White House, other players in the system. What this letter tries to do by putting it in the mouth of lawyers, and dressing up what are really concerns about fairness and procedural preferences into legal absolutes. They're trying to make this a binary choice and just shut down what the House is trying to do. And again, that's just not historically how this works. It's a really dramatic escalation in the disagreements in the conflict between the two branches right now.

CO: But White House Counsel Pat Cipollone, he would know about what you've just said. So why would he write this letter?

GN: I can't answer that question. The history of the letter at the White House I have no insight too [CO laughs]. You know strategically, I think it's a mistake on the part of the White House.

CO: Why?

GN: Well, I think you've seen the reaction to the letter not just from me. I think lots of conservative and Republican lawyers have criticized the letter, and said that it really misunderstands Congress's role in our system. So I think they lost some credibility just there. And I also think that if they are as certain as they repeatedly assert that there is no good grounds for impeaching or removing the president on these facts, I think they should welcome some process. I mean we've seen historically when Congress gets over its skis and gets too aggressive with the impeachment power, it winds up blowing up in their face and being a net negative for them in the next election cycle. The president and the White House mostly cooperated with the Mueller investigation that wrapped up a few months ago. And I think it worked out well for them politically. They were able to claim that they were largely vindicated with some justification. A lot of Democratic members of Congress who leaned too aggressively into those claims came out looking worse for it. You know even Republicans who support the president are mindful of congressional power. And I think don't like to see their ability to conduct investigations so disparaged by the president. So I just think it was a strategic mistake in that regard.

CO: So why aren’t we hearing Republicans speaking out against it?

GN: Well, there are multiple dynamics at play. First of all, Congress is in recess, so most members of Congress aren't here in Washington. And the other thing is, of course, it is true that there are two conversations here. One is about process and the powers of institutions. And one is about kind of merits of the impeachment inquiry. And those can be conflated. And I think if Republicans are irritated by some of the procedural tactics the president has taken, that doesn't mean that they favour his impeachment or removal. And I think they don't want to have those things confused in the public mind. They don't want their voters and the president's voters to think that some of these institutional disagreements are connected to the merits of the case. So I think a lot of the dissatisfaction with this letter and arguments it’s made will be played out more quietly in Washington rather than in the newspapers and on television.

CO: Of course, the centre of all this is this phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, where Mr. Trump asks for an investigation into his political rival, Joe Biden, and Joe Biden's son Hunter. From what you've seen already, do you think there are good grounds for impeachment?

GN: I think there are certainly good grounds to open an impeachment inquiry around that. I think there is still a fair amount of murkiness about the timeline, what other people the administration, how they were involved, what they said, when, what the president wanted. There's a view of events in which the president may have said something regrettable, but not the kind of thing that Congress would be motivated to remove him for. And I think that's where most Republicans are today. I think a lot more would have to emerge for at least Republicans to start thinking that impeachment is warranted. Democrats, of course, many Democrats here in Congress have been calling for the president's impeachment for years before any of this happened. We've had resolutions filed in Congress to remove the president over his tweets that people find offensive. So if there is some defensiveness on the Republican side of the aisle, there's also been a historical hair trigger on the Democratic side of the aisle on all questions related to Mr. Trump. Hopefully, our leaders will begin to put some principles ahead of short-term partisan interest and take a longer term view of these things.

CO: All right. We'll be watching. Gregg, thank you.

GN: Thank you so much.

CO: Bye.

GN: Bye.

TA: Gregg Nunziata is a lawyer who has worked for Republican Senator Marco Rubio, and Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee. He was in Washington, D.C.

[Music: Jazz]

Nobel Prize literature winner

Guest: Jennifer Croft

TA: This morning in Stockholm, the Swedish Academy had two Nobel prizes for Literature to hand out. Last year's event had to be nixed after a scandal, so they had some catching up to do. Today's announcement was formal. But if you listened carefully, there were signs that the 2018 winner is a woman who's shaking things up.

SOUNDCLIP

SPEAKER: The Nobel Prize in Literature for 2018 is awarded to the Polish author Olga Tokarczuk, for her narrative imagination. That with an encyclopedic passion represents the crossing of boundaries as a form of life.

TA: The Swedish Academy celebrated Olga Tokarczuk this morning. But boundary-crossing isn't a simple thing amidst the right-wing nationalism that dominates Poland right now. Jennifer Croft is the translator of Olga Tokarczuk's Mann Booker International Prize Winning novel "Flights". We reached Ms. Croft in Los Angeles.

CO: Jennifer, describe for us the moment that you got the news?

JENNIFER CROFT: Well, I actually had been expecting the news for a few years now. And I predicted it this year a couple of days that go on social media. And yet, when I saw my phone going crazy at four o'clock in the morning my time, I knew what had happened. And I just could not stop crying, and just racing around the house terrifying my cats — who have not yet forgiven me many hours later. [CO and JC laugh]

CO: Have you been able to reach Olga Tokarczuk, and talk to her about this win?

JC: We have been trying to reach her all day, but she tends to not love being in the spotlight. So I'm sure she'll need 24 hours or so to process what is happening.

CO: She had a very brief response when they called her. She said that she was surprised, and she cannot find the right words — which seem strange from a writer like her [laugh].

JC: Yeah, I mean it wasn't in her native language, so I guess that impacts it a little bit.

CO: What do you think finally led them to choose her for the Nobel Prize?

JC: You know, I think it is sort of high time, but also the perfect time because her very independent-minded work has sort of traced its own arc, but gradually come to intersect with a lot of contemporary concerns in the western world. She is, of course, a feminist, and an environmentalist. And lately, she's been thinking a lot about crossing all kinds of boundaries, gender boundaries, and borders, national borders. Her most recent novel “The Books of Jacob” is all about conversion from one faith to another, translations from one language to another, and refugees of all different sorts in the 18th century. And, of course, the quality of her work has remained so excellent throughout her 30 year career. I just think that now is really a great time to reward that, and to bring more readers to her many wonderful books.

CO: She did say she was pleased that the award went to someone from Central Europe. And that given the struggles that Poland and other countries in the region are having with nationalism, and with ultra-conservatism, this was the time when they needed to get that kind of recognition. What is she up against? What is she up against in terms of Polish conservatives, and their reactions to her writing?

JC: Well, this book that I mentioned — “The Books of Jacob” — when it came out in 2014, it was an instant bestseller. But when it when Poland's highest literary price in 2015, it launched a whole controversy with lots of trolls calling for her to be deported, making rape threats, credible death threats. All because she was encouraging poles to rethink their history, and to remember that, in fact, Poland was once a very diverse place that included many languages, many faiths, many races, many tribes. And people were really uncomfortable at that notion because there's been a lot of effort in recent years to sort of fashion a perfect pure Polish-ness against this perceived onslaught of now refugees, but also immigrants, and just kind of like an opening up of the border then. And who knows what would happen, and how Polish-ness might be diluted. And, of course, Poland has a very complicated history, and has been wiped off the face of the global map for very long periods of time. So there is an understandable defensiveness that nonetheless is extremely alarming to anyone who cares about human rights, for example.

CO: And non-polls have a great deal of interest in her, don't they, which was only possible once she had been translated. You translated “Flights”, and now you're working on another one. But you had to convince your publisher to let you do that translation, right?

JC: Well, I mean, I translated quite a bit of the book. So I was able to give samples of her beautiful, lyrical prose. And to show her incredibly nuanced psychological precision. She, of course, trained as a psychologist. And to also just show in the case of “Flights”, this brilliant structure that she calls a constellation novel. In which seemingly unconnected fragments and stories are connected by the reader as she reads along. As one may look up at the night sky and connect the dots between the stars to make a pattern or a constellation. And that's such a cool idea, and it's such a fun idea. It's a really fun experiment, as many of Olga's books are. But editors were a little bit nervous about doing something that looked unusual and not necessarily commercially-viable, although it turned out to sell perfectly well.

CO: How do you feel about that the fact that you got that going? That you got her into the English language?

JC: Well, that's kind of you it was. It was a team effort. There's another translator into English. Of course, she has many translators in too many languages. But Antonio Lloyd Jones, who is based in the UK, has also has also been working very long and very hard to get her into English. I think we’re both just completely overwhelmed today. We're just so moved by this, and so proud of her, and so thrilled that more people are going to be reading her.

CO: And when you do get a chance to speak, what do you want to say to her?

JC: Oh gosh, that's hard. Actually, you expressed surprise that she didn't have the words. But I feel like I don't really have anything to say to her. I just want to give her a big hug. I'm eager to just see her in-person.

CO: Jennifer, thank you.

JC: Thank you so much.

CO: Bye-bye.

TA: Jennier Croft is one of Olga Tokarczuk's English-language translators. Today, Olga Tokarczuk was awarded the 2018 Nobel Prize for Literature. We reached Jennifer Croft in Los Angeles.

[Music: Ambient]

Stuck on logging road

Guest: Paul Jones

TA: Earlier this month, Nolan Johnston and Jakob Thornton went for a dirt-bike ride. They're high school students from Pender Bay, on British Columbia's Sunshine Coast — so there are lots of places to explore. One of them was a logging road — which is where they came upon a red SUV — and found a 90-year-old man inside, in rough shape. It was Paul Jones. We reached Paul Jones at his home in Garden Bay, British Columbia.

CO: Mr. Jones, when those teenagers showed up next to your car, how long had you been on the logging road?

PAUL JONES: I had been stranded there since Monday afternoon. And it was now 6 p.m. I think on Wednesday.

CO: And how did you feel? When you when you saw those two fellows come along, what feelings, what thoughts went through your mind?

PJ: Look, I was so delighted to see them that I banged quite vigorously on the window — which I had been unable to put up or down for several hours. You know, my car battery had died.

CO: But, these two fellows on their dirt bikes.

PJ: Yeah, they went by me at about 40 miles an hour [CO and PJ laugh].

CO: What was their reaction when they saw that you were inside the car?

PJ: Well, they had a puzzled look on their face. They sort of shook their heads, And they put their thumbs up. And I put my thumbs up. And then I think they were ready to take off. And you know they sort that was my signal that I was okay and they could go. But I had to bang on the window again to get and get them to open up the door.

CO: What kind of shape were you in by that point?

PJ: I really was quite weak and feeble, I guess, having not had any water 24 hours. And having been confined there yes to the car most of the time, I tried twice during that same day on Wednesday to get out of the car, but found I couldn't. I was too weak.

CO: So if those two young men had not found you, what do you think would have happened?

PJ: Well, you know just before they came, I had noticed a few drops of rain on my skylight. And before I went through the second night, I had opened the skylight about a quarter of an inch — knowing that if it did rain, I may get a little bit of water into the car, which I could use.

CO: Wow! You were thinking then.

PJ I was thinking, yes. Here was these few drops of rain, and then these two guys come by. And I was so amazed and delighted.

CO: How did you get stuck?

PJ: Well, the road I had come down was very badly washed out. There's a lot of sand in the soil, and so I was I was high-centred on what was really a big sand pile. My left-hand wheel was almost in the air, and I was high-centred at the back of the car. And my right-hand wheel was you know not very able to hang onto the road. So I was in dire straits. And you know I looked at my situation. I'd slid out of the car and dashed around the whole thing before I got back into the passenger side and looked then at my situation when I first got stuck. And I realized that this was a really bad situation to be in. I better not try and move the car anymore. Otherwise, it might be it might tip over onto its left side into the ditch — which was about six feet below me.

CO: What did you have in the way of food or water?

PJ: I had a jar of cashew nuts with no salt. And that was wonderful. That saved my life I think probably [laughing].

CO: Absolutely. And you had a bit of water?

PJ: I just had a half a bottle of water, believe it or not. And I finished that I guess in the first couple of days.

CO: And did you have any cashews left by you were found?

PJ: Yeah, I have I have a bottle of cashews [CO and PJ laugh].

CO: Do you think you'll ever be cashews again?

PJ: I think I will. I sure will, yeah. I certainly didn't.

CO: I just wonder when you were there, when you were sleeping the night, it's cold up there at night, [PJ chuckles] what was your worst moment during that ordeal?

PJ: It wasn't good. It was very uncomfortable. I managed to get the seat fairly well straightened out into a sort of bed. But I was on an angle, and I was constantly sliding over.

CO: And then the car battery died. So that was a pretty bad moment I'm sure?

PJ: That really was very bad, yes. I'd been able to start the car using one of my sticks to push on the on the brake pedal. And otherwise, I didn't want to move over on that side. At one point, the jar of cashew nuts fell on my lap under the driver's seat.

CO: Oh no!

PJ: I leaned over towards, and the car and started to tip into the ditch. I thought I better not do that anymore.

CO: [laughing] Oh gosh! you're still going to have cashews there I’m sure when you get the car back.

PJ: My daughter thankfully cleaned up all the mess.

CO: I understand you have met up with the two teenagers again this week. Did you go out and have a dinner together or anything?

PJ: We had a lovely dinner, yeah. And for our trouble, it was it was a meal put on by this Grasshopper Pub here. And it was for free, how’s that? [CO and PJ laugh]

CO: And what did you say to the boys?

PJ: Well, I couldn't thank them enough.

CO: What did you learn? What are the lessons learned from this?

PJ: Let folks know where the hell you're going if you’re going up into the bush like that.

CO: [laughing] I think that's very good advice whether you're nine or 90.

PJ: Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely, yeah.

CO: Mr. Jones, I'm so happy that you're okay. I really appreciate you telling us the story.

PJ: Thank you very much, Carol, for phoning me and thinking of me.

CO: All right. I'll think of you every time I eat cashews.

PJ: [laughing] Bye-bye. Thank you.

CO: Bye-bye.

TA: That was Paul Jones in Garden Bay, British Columbia. If you'd like to see some pictures from his meet-up with the teenagers who helped him out, visit our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient]

Tomahawk Chop

TA: Why did the Atlanta Braves get knocked out of the playoffs in such humiliating fashion last night? Was it the lousy pitching that allowed the St. Louis Cardinals to score a record ten runs in the first inning, on their way to a 13-to-1 victory? Bad fielding? The Cardinals' relentless bats? Lots of factors, but let's see what Georgia State Representative Trey Kelly thinks. Quote: "Have to feel this is karma for the unjustified and rash decision to do away with foam tomahawks." Unquote. Interesting. And ludicrous. But let me explain. The Atlanta Braves have a time-dishonoured tradition: the so-called "Tomahawk Chop". Fans make a "chopping" motion with foam tomahawks given to fans at home games. Last night, though: no tomahawks. Because, in an interview before the game, St. Louis Cardinals relief pitcher Ryan Helsley — a member of the Cherokee Nation — said, quote: "I think it's a misrepresentation of the Cherokee people or Native Americans in general." Unquote. After that criticism, a Braves decision was made: no tomahawks ever, because it's disrespectful and racist. Just kidding: the decision was just no tomahawks last night, since Mr. Helsley was there. And, the team said, "We look forward to a continued dialogue with those in the Native American community after the postseason concludes." Unquote. Well, it concluded hard last night. And Trey Kelly — and several other Republicans — blame the lack of tomahawks. But they should face facts. Their team just didn't have the chops.

[Music: Jazz]

Part two: Fortune Bay salmon, Youtube impersonator

Fortune Bay salmon

Guest: James Dinn

TA: Fortune Bay on Newfoundland's South Shore is not a pretty sight these days. And it smells worse than it looks. For weeks now, dead salmon have been rotting inside massive fish farm cages. There are potentially as many as one-point-eight million of them in the middle of the bay. The clean-up operation is massive, and putrid. CBC host Anthony Germain reported from the scene last week. And what he saw might make your stomach turn.

SOUNDCLIP

ANTHONY GERMAIN: Liquefied, it looks like stew coming up. And when we got there, we could see these chutes on the sides of the vessels just spewing this pink froth back into the ocean. And then on the surface of the water, what’s also coming up with that by-product is fat. You'll see globs of fat all over the area. We sailed around, you could see it here and there, patches of skin, bits of fish, and globs of fat. Now, depending on the current and the winds, that fat is being taken ashore. And so there are certain areas, little coves, tiny beaches that look like they're covered in bacon fat. If you think about how hard it is to clean bacon fat off a cold frying pan, it's quite the mess.

TA: James Dinn is a Newfoundland and Labrador NDP MHA. We reached him in St. John's.

CO: Mr. Dinn, that is well quite an image from Anthony Germain. What do you make of that description?

JAMES DINN: Shocking really, disturbing, not only because of the imagery. But also the one thing he couldn't comment on — or that couldn't be transmitted through those images — is the smell and the stench down there. People who've been there talk about it's been for miles away. And they’ll run until well before they see it.

CO: So this wasn't just an overnight event, was it? This has been going on for some weeks now. What have we learned about how nearly two million farmed salmon may have died — or did die — in these massive cages at a fish farm?

JD: That is the great mystery, and probably one of the reasons why we want an independent investigation. Not an inquiry, but an investigation. To, first of all, determine timelines. From what we gather, this first came out during a conference that the aquaculture industry was having in St. John's. I don't think they wanted it to come out of that time. But there is indication that as early as three weeks before that, at the 1st of September, there was knowledge of this. The question is now is how much earlier did people know? And I've heard from some people in the industry that they've they had informed the in the company of problems before September. So one of the things we need to get at here are the answers. Because they're not coming out quickly enough, and they're not coming out fast enough. And for people to say I think it's been said by the minister that we can’t even give an accurate estimate.

CO: An estimate of how many fish you mean?

JD: Of how many fish died. If nothing else, we should know how many fish were in the pens to begin with.

CO: But is part of the confusion because some are saying that the pens they were overcrowded. Salmon were crammed in those cages. And the cages themselves would add up to about two million — that's what they should be holding.

JD: That’s right. So at least if nothing else, you can say well a maximum. We don't even know if any fish escaped. I've heard the reports again from people who've been down there — people in these fishing industry — who’ve said that basically the nets were weighed down. Live fish escaped over the top. That's probably one of the most disturbing aspects of this in addition to the damages. The answers —the information — is still coming out. And then to be told at one point that we'll have to wait until the annual report to get all of this information to me that's just reckless and irresponsible.

CO: But isn't it irresponsible to put out preliminary information? I mean some of the theories are that it's the warmer temperatures of the water. And that's the case, that takes a fair bit of data and research to know if that's the reason why there was this die off. Don't we need to wait until we get all the facts?

JD: Look, I totally agree with you. I heard one of their spokespeople talk about climate change as a reason. And I think that climate change has become very quickly a convenient excuse — an excuse of convenience — because it's not like climate change has been sneaking up on us. We've known about this. So if they know that climate change is a is a factor here, they should've been taking measures to mitigate this a long time ago. And that's the other thing. How many fish are in these pens? Were the pens long enough for the fish to move up and down to get to the cooler and more oxygenated water? There's an awful lot here — unanswered questions and everything that’s just truly angering people.

CO: Now, what we hear from your fisheries minister, Gerry Byrne, who says that yeah, it's not pretty. It's pretty ugly. In fact, we just heard from Anthony. But at the same time, he says he compares it to how people described the seal hunt. And that's how it’s been sensationalized. And people are using images to demonize this industry, which in fact, brings in a lot of investment and jobs in your province, doesn't it?

JD: I think that comes close to an ad hominem attack, the fact that if you've got nothing logical to say about it, then you make that that outrageous comparison. The minister's also compared this since it to a case of so many cabbages dying off because of frost. I have a feeling, Carol, that if you had upwards of two million cabbages dying off in a frost, we'd still be upset. But then the economic and particularly the environmental implications wouldn't be as bad as this. You got people hurt here. You get the environment hurt here. And both the industry and the minister are not coming out with the answers fast enough and with measures to how to how to treat this.

CO: How has the environment been hurt? What have you learned as far as the effects it's having on the environment?

JD: When you've got that much decaying biomass, I'm sure it's going to suck the oxygen out of the water. It's going to create other problems. But apart from that, if indeed salmon escaped, they will be in the rivers potentially breeding with wild Atlantic salmon. Plus bacon fat on rocks, I don't know. It's ugly, and if you're gonna convince me otherwise that this is not going to harm the environment, you better start by presenting the data that shows that this will have no effect — because I'm just not buying it.

CO: The federal Liberals are campaigning on a promise to phase out the salmon farms, the coastal salmon farms in British Columbia, and bring them into inland farming — which is as you know more expensive. Do you think the same thing had happened on the East Coast?

JD: Right now, if this industry is going to be managed the same way this episode was, then yes, let's move to it real quickly. We know that there are challenges with land-based agriculture. And yes, we would like to see a transition plan to a land-based system. The argument made is that Newfoundland is so far away from the markets that land-basedd system that costs will not make it profitable. However, I would suggest that right now, there are many other sea-based operations closer to markets. Why are they able to make money in Newfoundland? Is it because of the last lax regulations? Is it because of the fact that they may not have to clean up messes like this? Let's start right now with an investigation, and then to me, let's review, do an independent review of our own salmon regulations and legislation here in the province, and then put them into legislation and make them effective and start fining companies that are not living up to the standards.

CO: Mr. Dinn, I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

JD: You're welcome. Thank you very much. And pleasure talking to you.

TA: James Dinn is a Newfoundland and Labrador NDP MHA. We reached him in St. John's.

[Music: Ambient]

Youtube impersonator

Guest: Dana Oliver

SOUNDCLIP

SINGER: Blippi, so much to learn about. It'll make you want shout Blippi.

BLIPPI: Hey, it's me, Blippi. Oooo, and it's nighttime, and we're in a parking lot. There's so many stores.

TA: Just one of the many zany adventures that YouTube star Blippi has gotten into. Over the years, Blippi's videos have earned him millions of subscribers, and millions of dollars. But some fans, and their parents, find the news about his live tour a bit rich. It seems the Blippi onstage won't be portrayed by the same actor who plays him on YouTube — creator Stevin John — which a lot of those parents didn't discover until after they'd shelled out hundreds of dollars for tickets. Dana Oliver is one such parent. We reached her in Kitchener, Ontario.

CO: Dana, first of all, for the uninitiated, who is Blippi?

DANA OLIVER: Blippi is actually a YouTube sensation. He is someone that my almost-three-year-old adores dearly. He makes children's videos [chuckle].

CO: Okay, so when you heard that you're going to be able to see Blippi, how did your family react?

DO: My husband actually sent me a text message right away with a bunch of exclamation points saying that he was actually going to be here in Toronto, which I thought would never happen. So trying to be “Mom of the Year”, I jumped right away to get those tickets.

CO: But now there's so many kids shows, so many characters, so what it is about Blippi that attracts your son so much?

DO: You know, I asked myself the same thing [CO laughs.] But it's eye-catching for his age. I mean there's so many crafts and ideas and places that he explores that you know sometimes my son will never be able to experience, museums, and all these things. And I mean my first initial reaction was wow, this guy is crazy! But I mean my son could not take his eyes off him. The way he dances, and the high-pitched voice he has, and his little comments and jokes. And he's just a really fun character for my son.

CO: How much did you pay for your tickets?

DO: Very close to 400 dollars.

CO: And that was for what? How many tickets?

DO: So that was admission for my son, who is almost 3, and myself and my husband. So it was about 63 dollars a ticket. And then I bought meet-and-greets. And they were an additional 50 dollars. You know, it was already pushing my budget. But I thought this was gonna be something that he would absolutely love.

CO: That would let you what… Go backstage and shake hands with Blippi?

DO: Yeah, and some pictures, and you know, he would be able to finally meet the person who is his comfort and his joy every morning and night.

CO: So at what point did you realize that the Blippi that you see on TV, and that your boy loves so much it would not be at the show?

DO: I finished my transaction and my purchase, and I was honestly I was probably more excited than anyone can imagine [CO chuckles]. So I went onto his Facebook page, and I put a comment under his once-in-a-lifetime live tour post, and said you know what? Thank you so much, like my son is going to be the happiest boy in the entire world. And someone had replied shortly after, and said I'm not sure if you heard, but it's not actually going to be Blippi. And so my heart sank like immediately. I had to look a little bit further into it, and it was 100 per cent true. And Blippy — Stevin John — would not be there.

CO: Wow! So where was it actually were you able to confirm that the man who plays Blippi would not show up in Toronto?

DO: So at first, I thought you know this can't be real. Like it's impossible that Blippi would put on a live show and not be there himself. So I went to where everybody said it was posted, and sure enough, in the frequently asked questions at the very bottom of the page, it says will Stevin John be there himself? And it said no. And that included the meet-and-greet — which was devastating to me. I actually sat at my desk and I started crying because I could just see the face that he would make if he got to meet this guy.

CO: What is Stevin John saying about it? Because you're not the only person who feels can I say duped? Is that a fair word?

DO: Oh, absolutely. Like it's something that I feel like he definitely took advantage of his audience knowing that they’re children. I mean, from what I've seen, Stevin John seems to think that Blippi is a character. And he thinks that he can have somebody impersonate Blippi just as well as him. And that he's doing the training and everything necessary to make that. But in my opinion — and I'm sure I'm not alone — there can never be another Blippi. Like it's not going to be the same way in my three-year-old's eyes when he goes up to do that meet-and-greet.

CO: Are you sure he wouldn't be able he'd be able to tell a difference?

DO: Oh, absolutely. Like when he is sitting there, feet away in front of my TV on YouTube always watching this, there is no question about it that he would know that that was not the real Blippi. There's no doubt in my mind. I know it would disappoint him. And he's little, and like sure, it's a cool Blippi celebration, but it's not Blippi.

CO: Of course, there are tens of millions of kids who watch Blippi. The estimates of the ad revenue from a YouTube broadcast like that range between one hundred thousand and one-and-a-half million dollars per month in YouTube ads alone. And he has merchandise that he sells on Amazon as well. So this man makes a lot of money, doesn't he?

DO: He does. He really does. And it's all really based on views. And who's going to view it but a child who's constantly asking for it. And my son’s seen every video that he's made. Always when he comes home, if he's scared, if he's had a bad day, if he's crying, he always says can I have a Blippi in my cup.

CO: Now, Ticketmaster is saying that it will issue refunds. There’s been so much controversy about this. Have you been able to get your money back?

DO: I haven't. I actually purchased mine through a different party called Eventbrite. But, at the end of the day, no, they did not give me a refund, and I am going to have to further investigate how to go forward with this.

CO: If you could speak to Stevin John, if he were listening, what would you say to him?

DO: I would say that you disappointed a lot of children. And I don't know what you're doing that's so busy making the millions of dollars that you have made off these and as in children, who really think that you are God's gift. I would say that you have a lot of disappointed little children. And maybe my three-year-old doesn't know that he could have had the potential to meet you. But I will, and I will be that forever disappointed parent that didn't get to see that look on his face, and that light in his eyes. There's hundreds of artists who will bend over backwards for their fans. And that's exactly what we are in this family. We are huge fans. And I just wish that you could have done better, and made yourself that person that you are in his eyes.

CO: Dana, I'm so sorry, and I'm sorry for Avery too. It sounds like it’s a big disappointment.

DO: Yeah, it is. Thank you so much.

CO: Bye-bye.

DO: Bye.

TA: Dana Oliver is one of many disgruntled parents who bought tickets to Blippi Live — which will not feature the original Blippi character. We reached Ms. Oliver in Kitchener, Ontario.

[Music: Jazz]

FOA: Octopus monument

TA: It takes a lot to raise eyebrows in New York City. But a new sculpture in Battery Park is managing that, with a playful take on NYC lore. The piece is billed as, quote, "A reminder as to why the parks close at dusk", unquote — and depicts a harrowing scene in which an unfortunate tourist is set upon by wolves. Happily, that incident did not, in fact, occur. Much like the event depicted in another sculpture by the same Staten Island artist, Joseph Reginella. That earlier work depicts a Staten Island ferry, packed with passengers, being pulled into the waters of the North Atlantic by a tentacled monster. We spoke with Mr. Reginella back in 2016 about his "Staten Island Ferry Octopus Disaster" sculpture.

CO: Joseph, what does your octopus monument look like?

JOSEPH REGINELLA: A cast bronze statue, depicting an octopus in mid-action, grabbing the Staten Island ferry and pulling it under water.

CO: And does it include some sort of plaque or description of what it is representing?

JR: It does. It's dedicated and loving memory to the lives lost on Cornelius Kolff, November 22^nd, 1963, and one of the most tragic mysterious maritime disasters in American history.

CO: What's the story of what happened that day?

JR: Approximately 4 a.m. on that morning in 1963, a ferry boat from Staten Island to go into Manhattan mysteriously sank. And it happened within a matter of moments. There's not many eyewitnesses. A couple eyewitnesses that had seen it, they say they claim large tentacles pulled the boat underwater. The pieces of the wreckage that did show up had large suction cup holes on the hull. The boat was never found because there’s really deep caverns down there. And it’s suspected that a giant octopus pulled the ferry down.

CO: And how many people does your story claim were lost in that ferry?

JR: Four hundred.

CO: And so how do people react to your monument when they see it?

JR: So it's in Battery Park Manhattan, facing the water. If you look out onto the water, you can see the Statue of Liberty. So you're looking at the harbour. So they look at this monument, they read the plaque, and they look what the monument is, and you can see they get this strange look on their face. Some of them put their hand to their mouth or by their chin, and they stare out into the water, and kind of just like walk away like confused.

CO: Do you ever tell anyone that it's simply not true? That you made it up?

JR: No, definitely not [laughing]. The whole premise of this was just to see how gullible people are. You know, a majority of people believe everything they read on the Internet. So when people did see this statue, I had these you know websites set up and Wikipedia pages that corroborated the facts. People say oh my God, this really did happen, you know? The funny thing is now that the curtain is pulled back, some people just don't pay attention because I've noticed a couple of people yesterday. Oh my God, I saw this in the news, and they still think it's real. They didn't read the story. They just saw a snippet of it in the paper that an octopus pulled the ferry down. So now it's just like fortifies that this is real to them.

CO: Now, because at 4:00 if according to this mythology 400 people died, don't they wonder — at least maybe not the tourists so much — but didn't anyone question as to how it is they've never heard of this before if there was such a huge disaster on the Staten Island Ferry?

JR: The day that it happened happened to be the day that John F. Kennedy was assassinated. So that's what the cover of the story is. How come I never heard of this? Because it happened the day the president was assassinated, and news coverage just you know swept under the rug, and you know leaned toward the president.

CO: So this is a very elaborate hoax. Even there was a museum you directed people to as well, is that right?

JR: Yes, I’d made brochures. And I put them throughout Manhattan at information centres — like tourist centers — and the brochures boasted the museum grounds had artifacts, an octopus petting zoo, an aquarium petting zoo. You know there's a virtual ferry that you could ride, and go through the motions of the boat sinking. Like all this really wacky stuff. But people believed it, and they’d take the ferry out, and they’d go this area on Staten Island. There's a cultural center called Snug Harbor, and as it houses half-a-dozen museums and a botanical garden. And they're walking around the grounds saying hey, where's this disaster museum? And the people on the grounds like what are you talking about? So I started getting nasty phone calls, you know this isn't right. You're misleading people. Even though some people assumed that it was fake, it was kind of like a treasure hunt for them, you know?

CO: You know, the idea that people are so gullible and it doesn't matter what is the truth. It's a bit frightening considering right now, where just people are saying we live in a time of where the truth doesn't matter, and you're watching this that come out even in the presidential campaign. I mean, this is a large thing you have revealed here.

JR: Yes, yes, it started off part-multimedia art project, part-hoax, and part-social experiment, and it's definitely very interesting to see how people take it.

TA: Staten Island artist Joseph Reginella is known for his work commemorating the "Staten Island Ferry Octopus Disaster," the "Brooklyn Bridge Elephant Stampede" and the "NYC UFO Tugboat Abduction." His most recent monument pays homage to the ferocious wolves of the Big Apple. To hear Mr. Reginella's full 2016 conversation with Carol, visit our website at: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: World music]

Part three: San Francisco phishing scam, Ottawa transit delays, California power cut

San Francisco phishing scam

Guest: Pieter Gunst

TA: You might like to think we'd be able to recognize a phone scam the minute that call comes through. But Pieter Gunst didn't. And he's spent years as a technology lawyer. Pieter Gunst is now the founder and CEO of Legal I-O — which helps corporations and state bar associations make better use of technology. He shared his story in a Twitter thread. We reached him in San Francisco, California.

CO: Pieter, tell us about the initial phone call you got. Who was it from?

PIETER GUNST: So the person calling me, in the first sentence, introduced themselves as working for my particular bank. So they named the bank, and they actually tried to call two times. They give me a call. It was a number I didn't recognize, so I didn't pick it up. But then immediately after that, the same number called again, and I thought this might be important. So I picked up the phone, and they said hey, this is you know your bank's speaking, it looks like there’s been a fraud attempt on your account.

CO: Okay, you didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday. So a bank calling you and saying something like that, did it set off any alarm bells?

PG: Well, you know it should have in retrospect. But I think one thing I learned is that if you're not super vigilant, and you're really deep into other things, and you get a phone call like that, it can be quite startling.

CO: So they said that there's been potential fraud. What did they ask you to do?

PG: Well, so they said someone tried to take 50 dollars out of an A.T.M. in Florida. Was this you? And I said that it wasn't me. And so then they said great, we've you know blocked this transaction, and we want to do some other things to up the security of your account. Can you please confirm the member number that you have with the bank?

CO: What's a member number?

PG: So the member number is a bit like a username, not every bank has its, but it's a unique identifier for each customer. And it's supposed to be a private number. It didn't seem super unreasonable for a bank to ask — although, of course, this should have wrung alarm bells. But no, I thought okay, this is a fair way to verify, and I gave them the number.

CO: But not the password, so that just on its own wouldn't have been able to have them break into your accounts, right?

PG: That right. With the number alone, you theoretically can't really do anything, or at least so I thought.

CO: Okay, what happened next.?

PG: Then they said look, we're going to verify your identity by sending a verification code to your cell phone. And the moment that this person said that, I received from the regular bank text number received a verification pin — a six-digit code. And they said can you please read this code to us?

CO: But this came from your bank? This appeared to be — or was — coming from your bank?

PG: It was. It was a very, very clever trick. What they figured out is that this particular bank, if you go to login, and you say I forgot my password, they ask for your member number. And then they basically allow you to do text message verification. And so by tricking me into reading the number, right? And the text came from the bank. It was from the bank.

CO: So they were pretending that they could see it, but they want to see if you could see it?

PG: Exactly, I read it out to them.

CO: And then they could change your password.

PG: That's what they did — seconds later.

CO: Wow! And so then what happened?

PG: So then they continued upping the credibility of the call. They basically gained account access, didn't do transactions, but could see information. And they said that we will now verify some other transactions to check whether these were fraudulent. And they started reading some recent transactions that I did. And so I confirmed all those charges as charges that I had made.

CO: And so it appeared that this was the bank, and it was reading your transactions, it had access to that, and it was verifying your account. So still felt quite legitimate. What did they do then?

PG: As soon as I confirmed the legitimacy of those transactions, they said okay, the next thing we are going to do is we are going to block the PIN number on your debit cards. So can you please provide us with that information, so that we can block future transactions? At that point, it was getting pretty clear that this wasn't a legitimate call. But the funny thing is that I still didn't fully think I was dealing with a scammer. I told the person the bank should update its procedures. I'm not giving you this number. And at that point, they started asserting authority. You're on a recorded line. We're not gonna be able to block this transaction if you don't give us this number. And kind of upping the aggressiveness of the call. At which point, I terminated it, and called fraud department.

CO: Because you knew this was a fraudulent call at that point?

PG: Yes, although I have to be honest, I was maybe 1,000 per cent aware. Like there was a world given the setup and how convincing they made it all that this was just a really poor bank policy. Now, the PIN number over the phone, you know I would never give it. And obviously, that is a huge red flag. So it triggered. But it's amazing how credible they made it feel.

CO: Can you imagine how easy it is for people to fall for that, and have given their number as well?

PG: Well, you know I've heard from so many people in the last 48 hours that have been subject to this. And they pull some clever tricks. For example, when I got that first call, the number displaying on my screen was the main number of my bank. They falsified the number. And so other victims basically had the bank contact info saved. And this further ups the credibility. And a turns out you can simply not rely on the phone number that you see on your screen. It's very easy to fake.

CO: Now, Pieter, you know this, you know all this. In fact, you work in technology and law. So what does it say that you should have fallen for this scam?

PG: Yeah, I read the thread 48 hours later. I’m like I would never fall for that, but I did. And you know I was caught, it was 10:30 in the morning. I was deeply working on something with my team, this call happens, and my guard was down. And it's just incredibly difficult to stay vigilant all the time. And with the right timing and execution, I think you can be successful with you know a reasonably sophisticated target.

CO: Okay, what are the lessons learned that you can pass on?

PG: Well, so you know I learned a lot. The easiest ways to block this would have been as soon as I received a call, say thank you. I will call you back on the number of my card. And that would essentially have stopped the attack. The second mistake was giving that member number. Just don't give personal information regardless who they say they are. You know, at a higher level, I was reminded of how difficult a problem that is, and how important it is that we share these stories so we can increase awareness. Because this is by no means a victimless crime.

CO: Yikes, okay. Cautionary tale from you, Pieter, thank you.

PG: Yeah, my pleasure.

CO: Take care. Bye-bye.

PG: bye.

TA: Pieter Gunst is the founder and CEO Legal I-O, and recently fell for a phishing phone scam. He spoke to us from San Francisco.

[Music: Ambient]

Rooming house fire

TA: For the parents of Alisha Lamers, justice can never fully be served. The circumstances that led to her death, they say, should never have arisen in the first place. In November, 2013, Ms. Lamers died, after an early-morning fire broke out in the unregistered Toronto rooming house where she was living. She was unconscious and suffering from second and third-degree burns over most of her body when rescuers pulled her from her basement suite. A coroner's report indicated a severe lack of oxygen resulted in brain death. The landlord was convicted for numerous fire code violations, and fined 75 thousand dollars. Now, Ms. Lamers's parents are suing him in civil court for five million dollars. Here's some of what Janet Moore and Robert Lamers told CBC reporter Katie Nicholson.

SOUNDCLIP

JANET MOORE: I'm just not the same person anymore. I've lost my drive to try things, and be happy. I have to really force myself to enjoy life. I have to remember that I'm not living for myself anymore. I'm living for Alisha too. It's been very difficult. We really miss her [breaking down].

ROBERT LAMERS: Yeah, I'm devastated, and lost. And not being a dad here anymore, it's difficult. Not having any meaning or purpose of direction in life anymore. I'm trying to find justice for Alicha, and some accountability for her being murdered. I believe that the landlord should be in jail for criminal negligence causing death. I don't know why there is no criminal charges? I can't understand how that's possible. And forcing her parents to seek justice is very cruel. It's been very cruel the last six years. And the city of Toronto has just turned a blind eye to this. They're well aware of the problem. And have done nothing for Alisha or anyone else. There's no accountability taken by anyone.

JM: There was nothing being done to hold the landlord accountable, other than the 75,000 dollar fees that he had to pay from the fines. And we lost a life. So that basically is telling me that the government thinks that if they fine him 75,000 dollars, that everything is okay. That's not okay. We lost our daughter. We lost a child. Somebody was killed that was trapped in a house that couldn't get out. And that should never happen. I would never want to see. What happened with Alisha to happen to anybody.

TA: Robert Lamers and Janet Moore speaking with the CBC's Katie Nicholson. The couple's daughter, Alisha Lamers, died in 2013, after being trapped in the basement suite of an unregistered rooming house destroyed by fire. Now, her parents are suing the property owner for five million dollars.

[Music: Ambient]

Ottawa transit delays

Guest: Daniel Fong

TA: The Light Rail Transit system in Ottawa was supposed to improve the lives of commuters. But so far, they're unmoved. Often, literally. It's only four days into its full launch — and three of those mornings have been chaos for commuters. Photos of hundreds of grumpy people, stuck shoulder-to-shoulder on train platforms, have been circulating on social media. Daniel Fong was in those crowds. He's an articling student at a law firm in Ottawa, and he commutes an hour each morning into the downtown core. That's where we reached him.

CO: Daniel, it seems like if you are going to use public transportation in Ottawa, you should get yourself a good pair of walking shoes.

DANIEL FONG: Well, a lot of people have been thinking about it. And, in fact, one of my buss buddies mentioned that she was going to wearing running shoes today in anticipation of walking.

CO: What's so difficult about commuting in Ottawa this week?

DF: For the past three days, there have been door jams on the trains that have caused the train to completely stop on the tracks, and delays of up to half-an-hour, or well around that, during people's commutes. Which means that everyone who has been dropped off at the terminal stations are just stuck there waiting for the trains to move.

CO: All right. And it keeps having people dropped off — more and more people arriving. I’ve seen the photos. It's quite extraordinary.

DF: Yes, they just drop you off, and then more keep coming and coming. And it gets really crowded there.

CO: What was the worst you saw this week?

DF: it was probably Tuesday, that was the first day that the major delays happened. Because it seemed OC Transpo didn't know what to do. They just assumed maybe the trains would fix themselves or I'm not sure what? [CO laughs] It took them a long time to start sending shuttle buses to help get people out of the station I was at — Tiny’s Pasture.

CO: So just describe the scene. Just give us the picture?

DF: Well, the train was completely full. The platform was completely full. People were standing on the stairs that go down to the platform. Tiny’s Pasture Station itself is a sort of big concrete area, that was pretty much full with OC Transpo staff trying to stop people from going down onto the platform. And the lineup with the door into the bus drop off area, past the first bus shelter, which is a few metres from the door. And more people were coming behind that.

CO: So when you arrive, when your bus pulls up, and you see that, what's the feeling that you get?

DF: Well, the thing about the way my bus pulls up is it kind of drops you off in a place where you don't necessarily see it because there's a couple of busses ahead. And so when I got off all three days this week — Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday — I thought it was just normal because it was people getting off the buses in front and people getting off the buses behind me. And then as we got close to the station, we realized that the crowd wasn't really dissipating.

CO: And there was something seriously wrong.

DF: Yes, just complete chaos I woud say.

CO: Well, no, not complete chaos. Because people in Ottawa are very polite, and they were standing there. I’ve been places where it would not have been polite. [laughing]

DF: Okay, fair enough. [CO and DF laugh]

CO: People in Ottawa know how to behave. But some of them don't. Because I guess the problem was is that some commuters tried to hold the doors open to get in, and that's what triggered the problem, right?

DF: That's what we're told. It could also have been people trying to get out. I'm not sure. I didn't see any of them, and the city officials don't seem to be super forthcoming about exactly how it went down. I don't think though that that's a huge problem trying to hold doors open because it happens on buses happens, it happens on public transit systems elsewhere, and they don't shut down an entire network.

CO: I do remember, and this is of course, just an anecdote. But when there are new trains in the subway in Toronto at the beginning, if people held the door open or jammed it in some way, after one of those, the doors would be triggered. They'd lock open because they thought they weren't supposed to be opened. It’s a safety mechanism that eventually they figured had to solve. Maybe that's part of your problem? I do remember, and this is, of course, just an anecdote. But when there are new trains in the subway in Toronto at the beginning, if people held the door open or jammed it in some way, after one of those, the doors would be triggered. They'd lock open because they thought they weren't supposed to be opened. It’s a safety mechanism that eventually they figured had to solve. Maybe that's part of your problem?

DF: Yeah, it might be. But you know there's also it seems to be a lack of an override for the train driver, and a lack of a plan for dealing with the train that does that because you don't want to have a train just stopped in the tracks with no way to get around it. That's going to cause a lot of delays on the network. And that's what we've been seeing for the past three days.

CO: Well, there must be something to it because Mayor Jim Watson of Ottawa floated the idea that there might be fines for people who hold doors open. Do you think that might be a solution?

DF: Well, I don't really think that is a solution because if we're talking about people getting off the train holding open the doors, I mean the trains are kind of narrow. It's really tight in there as well. So it's like shoulder-to-shoulder standing room during rush hour. So it's pretty tough to get out like that. And fines for bad design on the part of whoever made the trains, I don't think that's an appropriate solution.

CO: But I obviously, I mean, it’s either you really have a bad system or are there’s just a few bugs to work out. What are your hopes?

DF: I mean I always hope that everything goes well, but I'm pretty skeptical of the whole system.

CO: I know people were pretty excited about getting the LRT. That was really going to improve travel and public transportation in Ottawa. So what are people saying?

DF: Well, people are making sarcastic jokes about everything, OC Transpo, about the trains, about how much it costs, about the mayor, about John Manconi, who's head of OC Transpo. I mean people are grumbling at the station.

CO: But they're going to still have to get home tonight.

DF: Yeah, exactly.

CO: All right. Well, happy commute, Daniel.

DF: Well, I hope so.

CO: [laughing] Okay. Bye-bye.

DF: Bye.

TA: Daniel Fong is an articling student at a law firm and a commuter in Ottawa.

[Music: Instrumental]

California power cut

Guest: Deanne Mediati

TA: Deanne Mediati has no idea when her power will come back on. She lives in the foothills of Grass Valley, California, in an area called Nevada County. For the third time in a month, the Pacific Gas and Electric Company has deliberately turned off power to thousands of homes there, to ensure its electrical lines don't spark wildfires. This week's outage is the largest to date — forcing more than half a million Californians to live off the grid. But for Ms. Mediati, who lives with serious health issues, the latest shutdown is more than an inconvenience. We reached her at home in Grass Valley.

CO: Deanne, how long have you been living without electricity?

DEANNE MEDIATI: Second day now.

CO: And when was it turned off?

DA: At 3:30 in the morning yesterday.

CO: How did you know? What was the moment when you realized that you didn't have any power?

DA: Well, I was asleep. And my husband was awake, and the power went out. And he said I was breathing funny. So he woke me up.

CO: Why were you breathing funny?

DA: Well, I sleep was oxygen at night, and when I take naps during the day. If I don't have the extra oxygen, I don't breathe, and I end up having seizures, and I could die.

CO: The oxygen needs electricity, right?

DA: Yes, it does.

CO: Wow! And your husband also needs electricity, doesn't he?

DA: He is disabled as well. He's on dialysis. Fortunately, he's not doing it at home, but I don't know if he's going to be able to do dialysis or not because of the no power up at the place where he goes.

CO: Did you get any warning that you were going to lose power?

DA: I got some warnings. A lot of people are saying that they were warning everybody you should have been prepared. But what they were doing was letting us know that they might shut us off. I mean they were they were blowing my phone up, saying that it might be shut off. There's a possibility. Let us know you received this so you know that it might happen. And it's happened before where they shut power off, and they just skip over the medical baseline because we need our medical equipment.

CO: What do you mean skip over the medical baseline?

DA: Well, they don't shut us off. We need our medical equipment to survive. So legally, they can't shut the electricity off in my home. If I don't pay, which I have a hard time doing already, they can shut my gas off, but not my electricity.

CO: And when you talk about they, you mean the Pacific Gas and Electric, the utility company, right?

DA: Yeah, the power company — PG&E.

CO: So if I understand this correctly, the power shut offs are because they say they're trying to avoid sparking a wildfire. Last year, we know that when we covered the story of Campfire in Paradise, which killed a lot of people, PG&E — this company — were blamed for it. So they're saying that they need to cut off power to avoid sparking another wildfire, right?

DA: Right, I mean this town is shut down right now — our little town of Grass Valley. Nobody has power. None of the businesses are open. A few of them are that have generators. There's no gas to be found. You have to go kind of far to get gas. It's crazy actually. It's like apocalyptic.

CO: If there is a concern of then sparking a fire, is it not a good idea to turn off the power in order to avoid having such a kind of catastrophe?

DA: Yeah, I agree. But maybe like not this massive. Like I said, they've done it before. I mean they've been doing it up here for a few weeks. This I'm told it can take days to even turn people back on.

CO: There was a bushfire in another community in the San Francisco Bay area that forced evacuations there. Is it possible that that could happen in your community?

DA: Well, I guess anything's possible. You know, they say where the foothills, but we're not. We have the forest. We live in the forest. So it's predominantly pretty green up here. So I couldn't see grass valley being flattened by a fire, no.

CO: So what do you think Pacific Gas and Electric is up to? Do you think they really need to turn this off? They're facing a lot of criticism — and even a lot of legal issues — for how they've conducted things. What do you think the motivation is?

DA: You know, I don't know. I mean I've heard that the governor had signed something with the commissioner of California — the power commissioner — that they went ahead and did this because there are a number of giant transformers that go through like the whole state of California. And those are the ones that they shut down. And they said there's some kind of a storm happening. I’m not sure what kind of a storm, dust, high winds, I don't know. I don't see anything happening like that. That's what they told me anyway.

CO: That sounds pretty serious, doesn't it?

DA: Well, it does. But see, they've been doing that the last few weeks. Like I said before, they shut down like blocks of people at sections at a time, you know? And we were always skipped over it because of the medical baseline. That's why I'm a little shocked that everybody I know that's disabled has no power.

CO: What are the other issues you're dealing with not having electricity?

DA: Well, I have a chronic pain disorder. And anxiety triggers it. so I'm not feeling too good today. I haven't slept very well either.

CO: What about your appliances? Are you able to cook for yourself?

DA: I have a propane camping stove that we've been using.

CO: Okay.

DA: But yeah, we’ve got our little camping stove out. And we got candles. Snd there's no places open to eat, so you know you gotta do what you gotta do.

CO: What can you do about getting oxygen?

DA: I have a tank. It's like a portable one, but it's bigger. They're like old school. People used to bring them around before they had the portable electronic machines available. It’s just a tank full of oxygen.

CO: So you have a backup then?

DA: I do have a backup. And the thing is you have to make sure you have enough in there. Otherwise, you run out. So right now, I'm almost out of it. So they hopefully will be here today to refill it.

CO: Is this going to be the new normal in California, given the situation with dryness and fires?

DA: Possibly. It's possible. I understand PG&E, but I don't understand them shutting down all the elderly and disabled people. I mean there are people worse off than us. Both of my neighbours are disabled people. So they're going through the same thing I'm going through.

CO: All right. Deanne, I hope you get to power back.

DA: Us too. Thank you so much.

CO: Take care.

DA: You too. Thank you.

CO: Bye.

DA: Bye-bye.

TA: Deanne Mediati has been without electricity since yesterday morning, when California's largest power company started shutting off power to hundreds of thousands of customers in the state. We reached her in Grass Valley, California.

[Music: Ambient]

Microbrewery voting

TA: They want to encourage young people to head to the polls this election. And they think beer could help. That's the idea behind an initiative involving 23 Quebec microbreweries. Until the election, they are changing the name of one of their beers to "Moi Je Vote" — meaning "I'm Voting." Stephane Ostiguy came up with the idea. He's the co-founder and co-owner of Dieu du Ciel bar and microbrewery in Montreal. He told CBC “Daybreak” guest host Rebecca Ugolini how he came up with the idea:

SOUNDCLIP

STEPHANE OSTIGUY: Actually, it came it came up this summer. I was at a beer festival with one of my friends, and we were talking about the coming election, and the fact that you know for the past elections, the younger people didn't vote that much. And we thought it would be important that this generation you know realize their electoral weight. And they could use it to change the outcome of the election if they go out and vote according to their real beliefs.

REBECCA UGOLINI: So basically, the idea is all these breweries have changed name to one of their beers so that people say out loud that they're going to vote?

SO: We just hope that people realize that it is important to vote, even if our electoral system is not perfect. The goal is also we should come up to a bar like ours or any other bar that participates in this campaign to provoke some discussions about you know the importance of voting, and even discuss you know the different parties, you know, and their programs. And realize why they should vote for one and not for the other one. And I'm just start people talking more about political issues.

RU: I'm wondering about the taste of the "Moi Je Vote" beer? Is every bar that's participating, have you all been like okay, we're going to replace our blonde beer, and call it "Moi Je Vote"? Or does the taste of voting have a different taste in every different bar people are going to go?

SO: Yeah, any bar can decide whatever beer they want to rename. In our case, we chose one of our very accessible and popular beer, which is a blonde beer. But any bar can choose anything they want. Anything they feel that would fit the bill.

RU: What would you say to people who feel like there's no point in voting? Because a lot of people either choose to abstain, or just feel like their one vote doesn't make a difference.

SO: we're aiming this campaign that the people between 18 and 38 years old because they now constitute more than 30 per cent of the registered voters, which is a lot. Young people are very good at protesting, going to march in the street, which is nice. I totally agree with that. But it seems that when it comes to do the move that will probably make a bigger difference, they don't do it. So there's kind of a paradox there. And we'd like people to see that if we all go in the same direction, there really could be a change with the election.

TA: That was Stephane Ostiguy speaking with the CBC in Montreal. He's the co-founder of Dieu du Ciel bar and microbrewery.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

October 10, 2019 episode transcript

More Stories Like This