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 30, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Chris Howden

CAROL OFF: Hello, I'm Carol Off.

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

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

CH: Tonight:

CO: Lingering concerns. A new report on London's Grenfell Tower fire finds people died because firefighters were too intent on following official policy — and telling residents to stay where they were, rather than attempting an evacuation.

CH: Distress call. Ten suicide attempts have been reported in one Newfoundland and Labrador First Nation since Saturday — and now, the community is declaring a crisis.

CO: Bugs in the system. Author Ian McEwan tells us about turning his frustration over Brexit into a satirical book about a cockroach who turns into a man — who happens to be the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.

CH: Values judgment. Quebec Premier Francois Legault reveals his government's strategy for testing the values of immigrants to his province — and his singular choice is a multiple-choice test.

CO: The root vegetable of all evil. A Newfoundland woman carves out a niche for herself by carving out something other than a boring, unscary pumpkin — and that something is a turnip.

CH: And...as sewn as possible. When a Chicago crafter discovers a giant, unfinished quilting project at an estate sale, she uses social media to enlist dozens of strangers to complete it.

CH: As It Happens, the Wednesday edition. Radio that finds them all quilty by association.

[Music: Theme]

Part one: Grenfell report, Sheshatshiu suicide emergency, cross stitch project

Grenfell report

Guest: Nabil Choucair

CH: It started in the early morning of June 14th, 2017 — with a kitchen fire on the fourth floor of the Grenfell Tower apartment building in London. Emergency services told people to stay put in their apartments — help was on the way. Instead, the fire raged until dawn — and travelled all the way to the top of the building. Seventy-one people died that day. It was one of the worst disasters in modern British history. It led to a judicial inquiry — and a report released today. Sir Martin Moore-Bick is a former judge who chaired the inquiry. He found that the cladding that had been added to the outside of the building, during a renovation, was the principal reason why the fire became so fierce, so fast. But he also focused on the response from the London Fire Brigade. Here's part of his statement today, for the record.

SOUNDCLIP

MARTIN MOORE-BICK: I pay tribute to the courage and devotion to duty shown by firefighters, who repeatedly entered the building to rescue occupants at great risk to themselves. However, I'm critical of many aspects of the LFB’s response. Those who are liable to be called upon to act as incident commanders were not trained to recognize a fire in the external wall of a high rise building. Nor were they trained in how to respond to it. There was no contingency plan for evacuation of the tower. And the LFB failed to revoke the stay-put advice at a time when the stairs remained possible. Had it done so, more lives could have been saved.

CH: Nabil Choucair lost six family members in the Grenfell Tower fire. We reached him today at a coffee shop in London.

CO: Nabil, we just heard from the former judge who chaired the inquiry. He talked about the fire brigade not being trained properly, having no contingencies, all kinds of criticisms very critical of the London Fire Brigade. What do you think? How did you respond to that?

NABIL CHOICAIR: Obviously, on the night there was a lot of failures. The fire was beyond controllable. And we soon found out that within the inquiry and everything else that the stay-put should have been implemented a lot earlier. Had they implemented and taken away the stay-put and done a rescue mission, a lot of people would've been alive today and not lost their lives.

CO: We’ll just tell people what that is. The stay-put command was for people. It’s going to be okay. Everything's under control. Stay put for now, until you hear otherwise. Can you tell us how that affected your own family?

NC: Because of the stay-put, they've left it at the last minute. It meant you know the conditions were building up, and the smoke and the fire was all building up. It gave them no chance to escape. And you know this is a family. My mother was disabled. And my family had [breaking down] I just had three kids. So you can imagine with three kids, it's going to be very difficult — even if an adult takes each one.

CO: Nabil, I'm so sorry.

NC: Yeah.

CO: This was your mother, your sister, her husband, and the three girls.

NC: Three nieces.

CO: Your nieces.

NC: That's correct.

CO: They were on the 22nd floor.

NC: That's correct.

CO: Do you know anything about their efforts to get out? Do you know anything? Have you been able to learn anything?

NC: Yes, I have heard the reports of their phone calls. They tried. It was [breaking down] so, so bad at the time when they tried to get out. They tell them of the smoke. It’s so bad, and the fire, and everything else.

CO: Were you in communication with them?

NC: I was not in any communication. I heard the phone calls — the 9-9-9 phone calls — which you guys call them 9-1-1, you know?

CO: This report, it seems unusual to see a report that is so critical of a fire brigade. And to say that even though a tribute to the courage of the firefighters, just to say that they were not trained properly, there was no contingency to evacuate the tower, that so many things failed the people who were living in Grenfell Tower. Is this the report you wanted to hear?

NC: Well, we knew this from the inquiry. And we knew it would be probably in the report. So the report is just one thing. It is having changes and making changes is another thing.

CO: The head of Britain's main firefighters union says that the culprit to the fire was — and we've heard this many times — was the cladding — the flammable cladding — on the building that caught fire. They couldn't put it out. Then, others have said that it was not the firefighters, it was the 20 years of lax regulation in building code for these kinds of tall towers they cheaply built — and using material that was not safe. What's your reaction to that, to the defence that the brigade is putting up?

NC: I'm not surprised how they would say that. They have to defend themselves. But you know, you’re a firefighter, you have two jobs to do. You either put the fire out, or you rescue people. You failed — as in the fire brigade people — failed to rescue people, and you failed to put the fire out. Yeah, I mean you rescued some people — which we can give you credit for. But a lot of people on the top floor lost their lives because of you because you did not do what you were supposed to do, and you should admit to it.

CO: And this is reflected in the report. At the same time, there will be a continued investigation into other parts of the fire. There are, as you know, 200 buildings in Britain who still have the same kind of cladding on them that the Granville building had. What do you make of that that so little has changed for the other buildings where people live?

NC: It is something we’re always fighting. And we fight it. And we’ve visited the prime minister several times to talk about this. And we've told him. Because it means there is a lot of people out there still in high rise buildings with flammable material like Grenfell Tower. It's very worrying and scary for these people, you know, if another Grenfell breaks out.

CO: This has been two-and-a-half years that you have been looking for answers. And obviously, still this night is so fresh in your mind. How do you cope with it? How are you going on with your own life?

NC: My life has changed. It's never the same. Never will be the same [breaking down]. Losing a family is never going to be the same for us. Yet, we still have to keep fighting, so that people don't go through what we had to go through. Yet, to try and protect a lot of people because you wouldn't want to be in our place where we are now. It's beyond a nightmare.

CO: Nabil, I'm really sorry, once again. There's not much anyone can say to relieve what you've gone through, but I appreciate that you would speak with us. Thank you.

NC: That's okay. Thank you very much.

CO: Bye-bye.

NC: Thank you. Bye.

CH: Nabil Choucair lost his mother, his sister, his brother-in-law, and his three nieces in the Grenfell Tower apartment fire, in June of 2017. He was in London. Today, the first phase of a government inquiry into the fire issued its report. And you can find more on this story by visiting our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Sombre]

Sheshatshiu suicide emergency

Guest: Eugene Hart

CH: A First Nations community in Newfoundland and Labrador has declared a crisis — after ten suicide attempts in a matter of days. The Sheshatshiu Innu First Nation has asked for help to deal with the crisis. It follows the death of a 20-year-old woman, whose body was found in a nearby lake on Saturday. Eugene Hart is the chief of Sheshatshiu Innu First Nation — located about 30 kilometres northeast of Happy Valley-Goose Bay. That's where we reached him.

CO: Chief Hart, since you raised the alarm about this crisis in your community, are you getting the help you need?

EUGENE HART: Yes, we're getting those phone calls, one after another, which is so a success.

CO: But I understand the Premier himself called you to see what you need. What did he offer you?

EH: Well, he wanted to hear what I had to say, and I really appreciate him calling me and asking what can I do to help? Because normally it's the other way around, right? I’m thinking we’re going to have good, positive feedback.

CO: What do you think triggered the events of the last few days? Why do you think you had this sudden spate of suicide attempts?

EH: In the last year, we had about 14 deaths in our community. And in varieties from zero to elders, so there's all different kinds of reasons what happened there. I think there's a lot of grievings going on in the community. And grievance is hard, too. A lot of people don't like talking. A lot of people are closed in. And the incident we had here, or the tragedy we had here this past weekend, I know the whole community felt it.

CO: And we should point out when you say that many deaths — 14 deaths — you only have a few thousand people who live in Sheshatshiu, is that right?

EH: Yes, two thousand is our population.

CO: Can you tell us about what happened with this young woman who died that seems to have triggered the latest crisis?

EH: We lost a young girl over the weekend. And I think a lot of people are affected by it because of the search. It was like a twelve-hour search. And sometimes, you don't know what the outcome will be, how everything ends off, right?

CO: And they found her Saturday afternoon, near Lake Melville?

EH: Yes. I have no idea. I don't have any details at the moment what happened or what's the cause because she's not brought back yet.

CO: But you’re saying that this had a huge effect on the community — this search, and then discovering her discovering her?

EH: Yeah, discovering her, and how to accept the discovery, you know what I mean? There's just so many roles that plays in people's minds, and there's only so much you can take. And I think a lot of that is people has not let go yet. And then the more they hold on to it, the more tragedies is happening in the community, and the more you're not letting go. It's hard on your system, and your mind, and your body.

CO: You have been speaking out in your community for some time now about the importance of talking about the grief, of not keeping things to oneself. How important do you think it is for people to be able to talk about suicide?

EH: For me, my personal experience is it's important to be heard — even a five minute conversation. I'm not a master counselor, but I know what they're going through. And it's always important to talk to that person — even to say hello. I think that means a lot to a lot of people. And the grieving part takes a long time in this kind of situations because it’s the question that always lingers that you'll never get an answer for.

CO: You lost a sister, and a nephew, is that right?

EH: I did, yeah.

CO: How did their deaths affect you.

EH: The first one was really shocked. And you're always going to carry that with you. And you got to keep those memories alive. But it's a tragedy — and a phone call that no family would ever expect. And it’s a person's worst nightmare.

CO: Did you find people to speak with? Did you find a way to get help?

EH: Yes. My family — my wife and children — they all understood what I went through my own grieving.

CO: And you've encouraged others now to do the same as you did, to reach out and to find those to speak with you about these tragedies.

EH: Yes. And speaking with families that’s been through this as well helps too. It's no good to build it inside of you because it's just going to eat you out, you know what I mean? You need to discuss it — even if you don't like it.

CO: You also said that your community needed activities. The young people needed to have community. They needed to have recreation. They needed youth services that could help them. And you made a cry for support within your community. Did you get that?

EH: Yeah. When I first got elected, the province took away the recreation budget of $75,000. That was a big cut because without funding, you can't do anything with your community as well. So the youth centre that we are providing the funding ourselves, that's a big strain sometimes because you want to keep the centre going. Because the more active you have your youth in the evening, then they go home and they're tired. But if there's just if there's nothing on the go in the community, they want to be up to no good. They want to be up to vandalism. They want to be up to whatever you can name it, right?

CO: Yeah, you want to keep them focused. Well, maybe that's something the premier should know about when he talks to you again.

EH: Yeah, he's aware of all this.

CO: And so in the meantime, you feel the way to deal with this crisis is to get the word out and to encourage people to talk about it?

EH: Yes, It's important to get the word out right away because I’d rather do it now than wait until later. So why would I wait say until all this is going to be happening? I’d rather prevent it from happening. You don't want people saying well, why didn't you speak out earlier? So now, this is what I'm doing is speaking out early as much as I can is to start out what needs to get done and what needs to be in place.

CO: Well Chief Hart, I hope you get the resources and the help you need for your community. And I appreciate you speaking with us.

EH: Thank you so much.

EH: Thank you.

CH: Eugene Hart is the chief of Sheshatshiu Innu First Nation, in Newfoundland and Labrador — which is where we reached him. If you believe you or someone you know may be at risk of suicide, you can call the Canada Suicide Prevention Service at 1-833-456-4566. Again, that is 1-833-456-4566. Or text 45645.

[Music: Horns!]

Legault values

CH: Francois Legault says he's delivering on his promise to test the values of Quebec's immigrants. But the Quebec premier admits it isn't exactly the proposal that had filled his detractors with fear and his supporters with hope. The policy announced today is actually a multiple-choice test about what's legal in Quebec. And would-be immigrants would get multiple tries to get it right before even travelling to the province. That's a little different from the Premier's campaign commitment to assess the beliefs of newcomers before they acquire citizenship. In Quebec City today, reporters asked Premier Legault to explain.

SOUNDCLIP

FRANCOIS LEGAULT: I think it's important if somebody wants to come and live in Quebec to know that, for example, women are equal to men in Quebec. It's important in certain religion or extremism. People they don't agree with that. So I want to make sure that they know that. Also secularism with the new Bill 21, I think it's important before deciding and coming to Quebec to know that if you expect to be in a job in a position of authority, you will not have the right to wear a religious sign. So I think it's important that we understand the values and the society where you want to live.

[Crosstalk] REPORTER: What do you say to the rest of Canada that will say that this is another proof that Quebec is intolerant or even racist?

FL: If you compare our test to the tests already existing in Canada about knowing Canada, it's not very different. Of course, we have secularism where there's a difference. But I think it's important in Quebec. We are in a nation. We are a distinct society. We have our values. We have our charter that people know about our charter rights.

REPORTER: The fact that you allow three chances on the test…

FL: Right.

REPORTER: Does that make the test less tough?

FL: I don't think so because I think it's important that people learn those values. And maybe if they fail the first time, they will take some time to learn the values. And, of course, if we succeed — and I hope we succeed with the federal government — then those people who will have three years to succeed. And they'll have the time during those three years to learn about the values. But in the meantime, we're putting this test before entering in Quebec.

REPORTER: Have you given up on your negotiations with the federal government? Because this is not what the initial plan was, Mr. Legault.

FL: No, no, it's a first step. It’s an important step. It's even tougher because instead of giving three years, you have to succeed right at the beginning. But I would like to give them three years, so give them the time to learn the values in Quebec.

CH: Quebec Premier Francois Legault, speaking to reporters in Quebec City today.

[Music: Industrial]

Cross stich project

Guest: Shannon Downey

CH: It's been said that you reap what you sow. Now that phrase concerns farming, obviously, not needlepoint. But a Chicago woman is expanding its parameters — demonstrating that you can also reap what you don't sew, as in S-E-W. Last month, Shannon Downey was at an estate sale when she stumbled on an ambitious, unfinished quilting project. She bought it — despite not having any experience quilting. What she did have was access to a large online community — one she was able to stitch together, to help her with the project. We reached Shannon Downey in Chicago.

CO: Shannon, what was it about this unfinished project that made you decide to take it on?

SHANNON DOWNEY: You know, when I had walked into the house and seen the beautiful completed embroidered map on the wall, and spent about ten minutes just sort of really examining everything that she had done. And really, I had fallen in love with her stitching. And then when they directed me into the bedroom, they thought they were directed me to just some stitching materials. And when I went in, and I opened the Tupperware container, and I saw what it was, I just sort of sat down and thought oh, my goodness, I have to do this.

CO: What was in the container?

SD: It was an unfinished quilting project. But it was all like totally laid out, and all of the squares were sort of prepped. And she had started stitching New Jersey. That was what was on top. And it was like a state map quilt.

CO: Wow! Big? It's a big project?

SD: It's massive [laughing]. That's why I almost started crying [laughing]. Because I was just like oh no, this is going to take forever, but I have to do it.

CO: Oh my gosh! And this is, of course, the project, Rita Smith, who died last August at the age of 99. This is the estate auction you're at. And this was her project?

SD: Yeah, it was. I talked to her son, and he thought that particular project had probably been sitting around the house for about 20 years — that she had stopped doing major crafting projects because she was taking full-time care of her husband who was ill.

CO: But she was able to get New Jersey done.

SD: [laughing] She was able to get New Jersey. She actually got three states done. When I started unpacking it to mail all the pieces out, I realized that there were two states that were completed, and New Jersey had been started. So she did Alaska and Georgia.

CO: All right. When you say that you found these as you were getting things do I need to mail out, you have to tell us the story behind that. What did you conclude about this project?

SD: [laughing] That it was way too big for me. That it would take me years and years and years. So I thought well, I bet I can get some people to help me with this if I ask on Instagram. And so I went on Instagram that night, and I just showed pictures, and sort of said you guys, like I can't do this by myself. But there's no way that Rita is resting in peace knowing that this craft project is like out there uncompleted. So who wants to help me, you know, stitch some states? Thinking that I'd get a couple of people who were into the idea of helping just like embroider just a few of the states, just anything to help me out. And then I thought I'll just hire a quilter or something because I don't even quilt. So I was like well, I don't know how to do that. So I’ll hire somebody to do it. And then within 24 hours, I had a thousand volunteers offering to help me stitch it [CO chuckles].

CO: And the stitching, maybe just describe a bit more what it is? It’s quite beautiful with these state flowers, aren't they?

SD: Yeah. So the quilt is made up of hexagons. So it's each state outline, the state bird, and the state flower, along with like the year it was brought into the union and the order in which it was brought into the union. And then there are 50 stars — one for every state — that make up, you know, this quilt. And then like a giant U.S. map right in the middle.

CO: And you mailed these out.

SD: I did, yeah.

CO: Did you do that with some trepidation thinking well, what happens if no one sends Tennessee back? Or you lose Maine? I mean were you worried about that?

SD: Well, so I'm a realist. So I went onto Ebay, and I found another copy of that pattern, so that if any of the pieces didn't come back, I would have a backup that I could send out.

CO: So you're not completely a trusting soul, but mostly.

SD: No, no, no. I'm like 60 per cent optimist, 40 per cent realist.

CO: Okay. But this is the embroidery part of it. But this is a quilt, right? So what has to happen after you get these pieces back?

SD: Well, I'm learning all about that — which is a lot of fun. So vI'm going to have a whole new skill set by the end of this activity. There is a quilting studio in Chicago, and they have volunteered to help us, you know? Because when it comes back, we have to hand-stitch all the pieces into hexagon shapes, and then, you know, bind them together.

CO: Why does this matter so much to you?

SD: As a crafter, and as a maker, and as a woman, you know how much goes into something that is hand-made. But historically — and currently — there is very little respect or admiration for the amount of work that goes into creating a piece of art when it's made in fiber or by women. And so when I found this, and I thought of this woman who had lived 99 years, and had been making her entire life, you know, the completed piece on the wall about four five dollars. Like, I know how much time and effort and energy went into that. And then going in and seeing this uncompleted project, I had to finish it.

CO: You're doing this for Rita.

SD: I'm doing this for Rita.

CO: Where does it go when it's finished?

SD: Excellent question. The National Quilt Museum in Paducah, Kentucky has asked us if they can debut it.

CO: Wow!

SD: Yeah, we're excited. The hard part it's going be instead of stitching the map of the U.S. in the middle of the quilt, I thought well, Rita already did that. So we should centre Rita in this quilt. So the hard part is going to be giving up the piece that I bought because I love it so much to make that the centrepiece of the quilt.

CO: Would you like to think that someone would do this for you?

SD: Oh, absolutely. I have a list of people who are responsible for finishing any projects that I don't finish in the event of my untimely death [CO and SD laugh together].

CO: Wow! you just feel that these things — someone's project — should not be left unfinished?

SD: I do feel that way.

CO: Shannon, it's great to talk to you. Thank you.

SD: Thank you for having me.

CO: Bye.

CH: Shannon Downey is a crafter and embroider. We reached her in Chicago. For more on this story — and to see photos of Rita Smith's unfinished quilt — go to our website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Electronica]

Part two: Feature: Author Ian McEwan

Feature: Author Ian McEwan

Guest: Ian McEwan

CH: In Franz Kafka's short story "Metamorphosis", a guy named Gregor Samsa wakes from "troubled dreams" to find himself transformed into a giant insect. It's upsetting for him — partly because he's confused by his horrible new body — but also because he's going to be late for work. In Ian McEwan's new novella, "The Cockroach", a small insect wakes from troubled dreams to find itself transformed into a human — which is upsetting for the cockroach, because it's confused by its disgusting new body — but also because he's going to be late for work — as the British Prime Minister. That insect's metamorphosis into "Prime Minister Jim Sams" isn't even necessarily the most absurd thing in "The Cockroach". And Mr. McEwan uses all these fictional absurdities to explore what he feels is a real-life absurdity: Brexit. The deadline for the U.K. to leave the EU was, of course, tomorrow. But the EU has agreed to a delay, and a general election is set for December. Which means the long, strange Brexit crisis is still nowhere near its end. We reached Ian McEwan in Gloucestershire, England.

CO: Ian McEwan, Welcome back to As It Happens.

IAN MCEWAN: Thank you.

CO: I'm sure that many people in the United Kingdom are wishing they could wake up and discover that Brexit has just been a dream. At what point did you wake from your troubled dreams to find yourself with the idea for “The Cockroach”?

IM: Quite recently, actually. I think it must have been in June or July. I was just doodling around in a large notebook, and I found myself inverting that famous opening of Kafka's “Metamorphosis”. And almost immediately just wrote two three paragraphs, and thought oh, this is a short story — a humorous short story — about Brexit. But by the time I was a page or two in, I knew I was writing a short novella.

CO: And you say inverting by virtue of which that as in with Kafka, the man wakes up to find himself —this is Gregor Samsa — finds himself to be an insect on his back. In this case, a cockroach wakes up to find himself to be the prime minister of Great Britain.

IM: Yes, he wakes up in a small bedroom at the top of 10 Downing Street. He doesn't know straight away that he's the prime minister. It's only when an aide comes in and tells him. But he's rather pleased because he actually lives behind the skirting boards in the House of Commons, and he's listened to many parliamentary procedures. And he rather fancies himself with the despatch box.

CO: You have I know expressed despair, frustration, whatever else about Brexit since the vote. What made you feel that the best way to try and maybe purge that or deal with it or just explain it was through satire?

IM: [laughing] Well, there comes a point in in despair of this kind where you meet laughter coming the other way. And laughter stops to talk to despair. And out of that conversation comes this little story. I have been immensely frustrated. I cannot see the point of what we're about to do. Whether it's to do with immigration — which isn't going to change — sovereignty — which we're not going to get more of — every indicator suggests we're gonna be a little bit poorer. It's just so pointless. But many people are very committed to it, and it's going to happen. And I think just over half the country is now I think if we had a poll, the poll of polls suggest we're about 52 per cent for just remaining in the EU, but we're not going to get that chance, I think.

CO: At the same time, when you turn to commit this to satire. And we mentioned the absurdity of the Kafkaesque aspect, but it's also Jonathan Swift that has, I think, inspired quite a bit [laughing] in the Swiftian sense though life often outdoes you, doesn't it? No matter how outrageous you are in satire. And in this case, the bar is very high in the United Kingdom, is it not?

IM: Well, it's almost as high as the country just to the south of you [CO giggles], absolutely. I suppose this is more Swiftian in than Kafkaesque — apart from that opening. And Swift knew that a modest proposal or even the satirical sections of “Gulliver's Travels” was going to change nothing at all. I don't think this is going to change anyone's mind about anything. But I just had to make my mark in mockery — and some grotesquery, I suppose.

CO: [chuckling] “The Cockroach” is the government isn't trying to negotiate the departure from the European Union. It's not Brexit. It's something even more ridiculous, which is hard. Can you explain reversalism? This is what he is campaigning for, right?

IM: Yes. I mean, I was struggling to find something as absurd — if not more absurd — than Brexit. And I'm not sure I've succeeded. But it is pretty absurd. Basically, reversalism is the government's idea of making the money flow in different directions. So when it's your payday, actually you're the one handing over money to your employers. How do you get that money? Well, you have to go to the shops and buy things, and you come away not only with the goods, but the money with which you can afford your job. And the idea is that reversing the money flow will somehow revivify the economy. And it's all very well, but it gets a bit difficult when it comes to trading with other nations. So it rapidly devolves round the notion of reversalism in one country. And the government's floundering. And so the cockroaches come and take over the prime minister's role and all his ministers, and put a bit of stiffness in their back [CO chuckles], and push the project through. And actually, they succeed.

CO: This we're talking about, of course, Jim Sams is the prime minister. And [chuckling] we could be forgiven for comparing him to Boris Johnson. In fact, for me, I have to say the news started to blend with your book. Now, was that your intention?

IM: Well, I mean, you will have noticed that Jim Sams has brown hair, not blonde. So it's not mapped directly onto present circumstances — although, of course, it reads in parallel. And it could be any disastrous government project for which they've held a plebiscite and can go round saying the people have spoken. So yes, it's a Brexit tale. But I think if it ever happens that we've long forgotten Brexit — or just resigned ourselves to it — it could have a life still in application to other circumstances where a government seizes a terrible idea to please the populace and pushes ahead with it.

CO: There is an American president in “The Cockroach” and this is Archie Tupper, who has a tendency to tweet irritably. But Jim Sams is quite fascinated with his rhetoric and tweets. And at one point, he speaks of President Tupper's cranky, insulting tweets, and thinks from the land of the free, here was a lesson in imaginative freedom.

IM: Yes, float free of reality. And Jim Sams — the prime minister of Great Britain — rather sits at the American president's feet. I mean Sams’s own first attempt at tweets are pathetic. He says things like in my view. Well, of course, [CO Chuckles] that's to concede that there might be other views. Now, you don't find that in Trump in or Tupperish tweets. And also, he admires the punctuation, that triple exclamation marks, the caps. But I think you know Americans probably have a tougher job even than us living with Brexit. And I know that Dave Eggers has just produced a marvelous satire in also novella lens. And we've swapped. We sent each other our pdfs and enjoyed each other's anguish.

CO: Well, this is obviously companion literature, so I will look this up — but now, going back to Archie Tupper, at one point, Prime Minister Jim Sams starts to suspect that the president of the United States might be a fellow cockroach.

IM: Well, he says to him, I don’t know how to ask you this, but you know, how many legs do you have? [CO laughs] And the phone goes dead at that point, so you can draw your own conclusions.

CO Ian, there are several breathtaking instances of the kind of stirring empty language used by politicians. And in one case, it's the prime minister's manifesto for reversalism. How much fun was that to write?

IM: Well, I just looked at Hansard, to be quite honest.

CO: [chuckles] Ouch!

IM: And, more-or-less, lifted it straight out of there. I worried a bit about copyright, and then I thought what the hell.

CO: But how does he describe it? How does his sell reversalism?

IM: Well, he says that we will be free, and we will make our own decisions, and we will pitchfork the incubus of clockwise economic thinking off our backs. Now, here in Britain, everyone would know that Boris Johnson said that we would pitchfork the incubus of the EU — European Union — off our backs — an outrageous remark. That's the closest I think my cockroach gets to our current prime minister.

CO: But some of the wealthier people start to worry that this means that the unemployed — people who have no money — will actually become very rich because they don't have jobs, and so they can acquire wealth simply by shopping, and then getting money for shopping, and then never have to do anything for it.

IM: I know, but it's illegal to have a lot of money.

CO: Oh, that's right. You have to keep getting rid of it.

IM: You have to get rid of it. And the only way you can get rid of it is to get a job, [CO laughs] so everyone's got to keep working. And if you go and buy yourself a new fridge, and it's a really good one, then you're going to have to work a little harder because you cannot keep more than 25 pounds in your bank account. So, you know, it might catch on. Then I'll be really desolate.

CO: I was just going to say, any concerns that someone might read this and think oh, this is a manual, not a piece of satire?

IM: I think the current government would be most liable of all the 200 nations of the world to take this seriously and put it into action [CO chuckles].

CO: There’s a scene when Jim Sams — the prime minister — meets with the German chancellor, and she appears to be the first person to ask why are you doing this? [laughing]

IM: Why? She can hardly say anything else. And, in the end, poor Jim can only say because, because, because we said we would, because people said they wanted it. But then it just boils down to because he has no answers.

CO: This is As It Happens, and speaking with the Ian McEwan about his outrageous new book “The Cockroach”. In “The Cockroach”, there is also a referendum. And this one's on this idea of reversalism. And you write in the book that the result of that vote on reversalism is an unexpected one. And it comes out largely out of an alliance between the working poor and old people from all classes. So is that your view on Brexit? Is that how you see the Brexit result?

IM: Well, there are many factors. But yes, if I look at this sympathetically and seriously, Carol, I think that many people who are not flourishing within the status quo had no good reason to vote for it. Older people had, I think, a rather rosy image of some remote past where maybe they were invoking the Second World War when they say you know we stood alone. We never stood alone. We had Canadian troops, and Indians, and New Zealand troops, and Polish free fighters and the free French, [chuckle] and we never stood alone. But it's strong in the national narrative. And I think that's also another powerful element for people who are not particularly poor at all. And the other thing was immigration. London voted overwhelmingly to remain because we live alongside immigrants. We know them. We like them. It was people who didn't who voted to leave. But actually, as European Union migrants stopped coming here because they think it's unfriendly, we're getting more migration from Commonwealth countries. So migration will go on. And I think many leavers within a few years will have conveniently forgotten which way they voted.

CO: But since the vote, so much has been revealed about how the campaign was conducted, what people were told that wasn't true. There has been so much laid out since then.

IM: Yes, it's an emotional thing, Carol. And remember that we've got quite a vigorous and clever tabloid press here who have been banging on about the European Union as an oppressor for 30 or 40 years. Even the Treasury — the government's own economic departments — are quite clear that the economy will shrink — not only in the short term. That doesn't seem to play very much with those who want to leave.

CO: But why not? I mean, still after all of this, you said just maybe slightly 52 per cent would actually vote against it. After with all that's known, how are not more people discouraged by the idea of Brexit?

IM: Well, nearly everyone I know is a remainer. And we all live in our little echo chambers, I think. So no, I'm a Brexit junkie. I must have read three or four million words in the last three or four years. But, you know, I listened to the vox pops, and I've been in conversations with people who want to leave. And from my point of view, they are seriously misinformed about what benefits we've derived from the EU. And I think the campaign to remain led by David Cameron was very, very weakly conducted. It mostly played on the negatives of leaving, rather than the positives of remaining. And I'm surprised — as surprised as you are — that the more people have not changed their mind over time. One or two per cent have shifted. We're now launched on a Christmas election as it's called. It could well be that we'll be back with a hung parliament. I don't know. But I've got a feeling that even people who want to remain will vote for Boris Johnson because he's charismatic in their view. So I think those of us who passionately feel we’re making a great mistake finally are just going to have to shrug, and hope that like many things in life, it's never quite as bad as you think. We're going to spend the next 15 years slowly working our way, getting back all the trade deals we already have. We have about 74 trade deals around the world. We'll slowly work our way back with all the necessary institutions in the EU, security, cultural links, and it'll be a great waste of political, intellectual, emotional capital.

CO: And Boris Johnson and his ministers will go on to write their memoirs. But to return to Jim sams and his cabinet — which he discovers all but one to be fellow cockroaches — they are successful in getting reversalism passed and completing this. And then they scuttle out of Parliament and away [laughing]. But the question is what is in it for the cockroaches? Why do they do this?

IM: Well, Jim gives a speech at the end to his cabinet. They've left the bodies of the ministers and the prime minister, and they've all assembled in the cabinet room on the floor behind a wastepaper basket, before trudging back Downing Street along to the House of Parliament. And he give very stirring speech. He says generally cockroaches have flourished whenever there's poverty. Whenever the massive economic downturn. Wherever the squalor and filth, and war and famine, and all kinds of human adversity have always been good. And he says some of the great disasters of our past has been the discovery of the germ theory of disease, and the discovery of hygiene, the stupid longing for fresh water. And we think now, he says, I think we're on the path to really flourishing again as the country gets poorer. And if the good-hearted, decent people of Britain find that they are less happy, they can console themselves that the cockroaches are happier. And the net amount of happiness in the universe will stay constant.

CO: But it will just be with the cockroaches, and not the people.

IM: Yeah, but he rather feels it's the cockroaches turn. Anyway, there's the motive. I mean the thing about cockroaches, I mean, they are objects of ugliness and disgust for us. But they're much more organized than we are — much more socially cohesive. So I think they were just the right kind of creature to come and sort this matter out.

CO: Of course, cockroaches are everywhere. So we are not immune from a cockroach takeover anyway. We shouldn't be smug about this.

IM: No, no, I think just as you know institutions in the States are fighting back, I've been on two of the enormous marches in London — pro-European Union marches. And I've never felt prouder of my country and countrymen and country women. And, you know, one of the tabloids described us, and by us I mean one-and-a-quarter million people, as a hate-filled crowd. It was so far from the truth. This was a merry crowd, inventive, funny with their banners, but just deeply saddened. And, you know, I think there is a very, very good solid streak of the British population that has been generally very, very welcoming to migrants, have been extremely tolerant. And I would put them in the tradition of Tom Paine in “The Rights of Man”. And governments will come and go. And I think the pendulum will swing the other way.

CO: Can we trouble you for a reading?

IM: Ye ah, sure. Hold on, let me just reach for my copy. So here is one of Jim Sams’s aides talking to him. In fact, Jim is going to sack him after this conversation. The whole thing's a mess, Jim. Time to call it off. And then he added softly. It's in your power. The prime minister stared into his advisor’s face, taking it in for the first time. It was narrow and long, hollow at the temples, with little brown eyes and a tight rosebud mouth. He had a gray three-day beard and wore trainers and a black silk suit over a Superman T-shirt. What you're saying is very interesting, the PM said at last. Well, it's my job to keep you in office, and this is the only way. It’d be a… Jim struggled for the word. He knew several variants in pheromone, but they were fading. And then he had it: a U-turn. Not quite, said the advisor. I've been back through some of your speeches, enough there to get you off the hook. Difficulties, doubts, delays, sort of stuff the hardliners hate you for. Surely you can prepare the ground. Very interesting, indeed. Jim stood up and stretched. I’ll need to talk to Shirley myself before the cabinet, and I'll need a few minutes alone. He began to walk round the long table toward the door. He is coming to feel some pleasure in his stride and a new sense of control. Improbable as it seemed, it was possible to feel stable on only two feet. It hardly bothered him to be so far off the ground. And he was glad now not to have eaten a blue bottle in another man's presence. It might not have gone down well. Simon — the advisor — said I'll wait for your thoughts then. Jim reached the door, and let the fingers of one strange hand rest lightly on the handle. Yes, he could drive this new machine. He turned, taking pleasure in doing it slowly until he was facing the advisor, who had not moved from his chair. You can have them now. I want your resignation letter on my desk within the half-hour, and I want you out of the building by 11:00.

CO: Wonderful. Ian, It's great to speak with you. And thank you very much for “The Cockroach” [laughing].

IM: Well, nice to be in touch with you again, Carol, and maybe until the next time.

CO: All right. Take care.

IM: You too. Bye.

CH: Ian McEwan is the author of the novella "The Cockroach" — a satire about the Brexit crisis. It's published by Alfred A. Knopf Canada. We reached Mr. McEwan in Gloucestershire. And we've got more on "The Cockroach" on our wepage at: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Instrumental]

Part three: Newspaper climate images, Heart Lake

MacKay on Scheer

CH: Andrew Scheer's loss was being played for laughs in Washington today. And the man drawing those laughs was one of the former colleagues of the Conservative leader — long-time cabinet minister Peter MacKay. Mr MacKay was at the Wilson Centre for a panel discussion on the Canadian election. The moderator was Sarah Goldfeder of the consulting firm Earnscliffe. Ms. Goldfeder began with a long list of the advantages the Conservatives had going into the election campaign. Then she turned to Mr. MacKay.

SOUNDCLIP

SARAH GOLDFEDER: What I'm gonna do is just ask you the question that everyone's thinking: is what exactly happened?

PETER MACKAY: Yeah, to use a good Canadian analogy, it was like having a breakaway on an open net, and missing the net [laughter in the background]. What went wrong? Well, I'm going to be very honest with you, I think there was a number of issues that became very prevalent in this election that nobody other than the politicos wanted to talk about. People did not want to talk about women's reproductive rights. They didn't want to talk about revisiting the issue of same sex marriage. And yet, that was thrust onto the agenda — and hung around Andrew Scheer’s neck like a stinking albatross, quite frankly. And he wasn't able to deftly deal with those issues when the opportunities arose. And I think among female voters, in particular, and those who would have been impacted by any and any revisition, it created a nervousness, or took them out of their comfort zone if they were considering voting Conservative. Which you know frankly having known Andrew Scheer, which Nick alluded to, like Stephen Harper, who was prime minister for almost ten years, there was no intention — and is no intention — to revisit those issues. But it created an aura — inaccurate — but impacted very much at that at that point when people entered the ballot box. I also think there's another major issue, and I do agree somewhat that it was a Seinfeldian election. There was opportunities to seize the agenda with the big issue. The closest in my view that we came to seeing a big issue was either climate or energy. And on energy, Andrew Scheer actually presented what I think was a compelling idea, but didn't fill in the blanks of having he called it an energy corridor. I’d call it a financial corridor. But the issue really didn't catch on, and it didn't really become a factor.

CH: That was former Conservative cabinet minister Peter MacKay speaking in Washington earlier today.

[Music: Indie rock]

Newspaper climate photos

Guest: Fiona Shields

CH: Emergency. Crisis. Existential threat. These are words more and more media outlets are employing in their coverage of climate change — or, rather, the climate crisis. Now the Guardian newspaper in Britain is taking things a step further — by taking a closer look at the imagery that so often accompanies this coverage. Fiona Shields is the head of photography for the Guardian. She's in London.

CO: Fiona, can you explain what provoked this change in the way you show images on climate change?

FIONA SHIELDS: Yeah. Well, it was really prompted in the first instance by the fact that the Guardian felt that we needed to change our language around the way we were talking about these stories. It seemed that our environmental journalists were reporting a much more kind of serious level of tone from scientists. So we discussed that what we were kind of dealing with really was not just climate change, but actually a kind of a catastrophic crisis. So what we realized was it was no longer appropriate to have quite kind of benign or passive images that went with this kind of serious change in tone. So you know kind of historically, we had perhaps used pictures of polar bears on melting icebergs, et cetera. And you know the picture of the polar bear feels like something that's quite remote and doesn't necessarily affect you know the human being reading the story at home.

CO: And so what kinds of images did you feel would have a bigger effect if you were to use?

FS: Okay. Well, it really is about human engagement. And so the effects of the climate change — and the climate crisis — on human beings became a more sort of appropriate way of illustrating these stories. So it is about the kind of the direct effect on human beings. So what we what we started to show in that case was you know kind of people who were sort of suffering from the effects of desperate pollution, or the torment of people who had lost their homes in wildfires. And it just kind of gives the you know the illustration a much more of an immediate effect. And it's much more active, I would say.

CO: And so what effect do you want these photos to have on your readers?

FS: Well, it is really about connecting them to what we believe is the direct impact of these environmental issues. And the scale and severity of the crisis that our environmental journalists are telling us they're discovering from the science.

CO: So you want them to have more of an emotional impact?

FS: Indeed, yes, yes. I mean getting the emotional tone right is absolutely critical.

CO: How does this compare to — or how does this complement — what you've changed in the style guide of the Guardian?

FS: So the language that we're using is much more active, I would say. And again, you know it's less benign, it's less passive. The phrase climate change is quite passive compared to a catastrophe for humanity or a crisis. We also changed the phrase global warming, again, which sounds quite cozy, to global heating, which is a bit more sort of severe and sincere. So it did feel that to kind of use pictures of you know very appealing creatures was not entirely appropriate with this kind of change in tone.

CO: Well, as well-intentioned as this might be, at what point does this cross the line from journalism to propaganda?

FS: Propaganda, I think, is probably quite an extreme accusation.

CO: I guess because of using emotional images in order to provoke a certain effect would be how propaganda would work. You’d want to advocacy. At what point do you cross the line away from journalism due to advocacy, propaganda, or whatever word you might want to use?

FS: Well, I think what we have to do is stay really close to what the science is telling us, and how our journalists are interpreting that. And if we do that, then we are being kind of accurate and appropriate in the images that we select. What we need to do is kind of be accurate and sincere about the tone of the journalism.

CO: So when you use catastrophe for humanity instead of climate change, you feel that that is being more accurate as opposed to being sensationalized?

FS: I think, honestly, there our journalists here do you believe that this is a catastrophe. And this is why we've changed the language. And it's also been described as a climate crisis by the United Nations secretary general. So it's becoming a kind of an accepted theme. But, again, it is based on you know the science that you know our journalists are interpreting.

CO: Again, as important as that is, and as the sense of many people have that this is something that is far more serious than perhaps many people realize. At the same time as journalism does it not have to stay in a certain place in order to have credibility? Do you worry at any level where people say well, that's just the Guardian, they're always going in that direction. I don't know if I can trust them. Do you have any place where you worry about that?

FS: I mean, you know, the truth is there will always be naysayers who don't believe that there is a climate catastrophe or a crisis in any way. They also perhaps don't believe that it's manmade. And I do think that kind of I am informed by the journalists who are interpreting the science here. I believe that you know the sincerity of their approach and their interpretation. And, for me, it kind of it comes down to that. So we just have to be very considerate about the tone of the stories and making sure that we are kind of reflecting what that's telling us.

CO: There's also that concern that people feel despair as though there's nothing they can do. How do you respond to that?

FS: Yeah. I mean, that is absolutely a challenge. And I think sometimes what you want to go down the route of is perhaps sort of solution-based imagery, where you sort of see people kind of thriving and surviving, you know, in situations where they, you know, where they have perhaps kind of faced some environmental-led hardship. So solutions is definitely a kind of a way forward.

CO: Fiona, I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

FS: Okay.

CH: Fiona Shields is the head of photography for the Guardian. We reached her in London. For more on this story, visit our website at: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient]

Turnip carving

CH: In the Peanuts cartoons, Linus van Pelt was known for three things — being Charlie Brown's best friend; hauling around his security blanket; and his unwavering belief in the Great Pumpkin. Each year, Linus would wait in a pumpkin patch — only to be disappointed, when the mystic spirit failed to appear, time and time again. But, according to a St. John's woman — he may have been counting on the wrong gourd. During the 19th century, folks in Ireland and Scotland carved faces into turnips — not pumpkins. And that's a practice Dee Payne is hoping to revive. She gave CBC Newfoundland's Heather Barrett a demonstration of turnip carving:

SOUNDCLIP

DEE PAYNE: It's just like sawing wood. It's really, really tough. [both laugh]

HEATHER BARRETT: Did you recall seeing many carved turnips around here when you were a kid?

DP: A few, but not a lot. I think it was mostly the older generations that did it.

[Sound: A loud crack]

DP: Oop, there we go. So that one lays flat, and then you have to, of course, cut the top off. Try not to cut my fingers off.

HB: All right. So now we're into the scooping part. And what implementer are you using for this here?

DP: This is basically an apple core-er, and I'm doing this now just to make it easier because it's very hard to carve. But it's just been the tradition over there that they’d cut the top off, carve it out, and then they put a candle in it, and tie the string on it, and carry it like that. Okay, so now we just use our ice cream scoop.

HB: I’ve got to say, it smells like turnip.

DP: It does. It's definitely a gourd. And it's flying all over the place there. But I guess it's all part of the fun too. Years ago, people were more patient than we are nowadays [laughing]. And they had nothing else to do. So I guess they spent hours carving their turnip.

HB: I keep thinking your arm is going to hurt a lot tomorrow. [DP laughs] How does it compare to say a pumpkin if you want to get elaborate in your in your carving?

DP: The pumpkin tends to be a lot easier. It's thinner and it's easier to work with. And there we go. There’s your turnip.

HB: A Halloween turnip. And he actually looks kind of threatening. Like, that's kind of a hostile looking face.

DP: Yeah, they were meant to be scary. And what people would do is put them on the doorstep to frighten away stingy Jack and other evil spirits around so that they wouldn't come into their house and attack them.

CH: That's turnip carver Dee Payne giving a demonstration to CBC's Heather Barrett.

[Music: Hip-hop]

Heart Lake

Guest: Karen Schonauer

CH: Heart Lake, in Eastern Ontario, is aptly named. It is a lake shaped like a heart — which is why people love it so much — and post aerial shots of it all over Instagram. Well, Karen Schonauer also loves Heart Lake, because her cottage is situated right behind it. She does not, however, love the hordes of people trespassing through her property, to get to Heart Lake. We reached Ms. Schonauer in Coxvale, Ontario.

CO: Karen, these photos of Heart Lake are gorgeous. So what's your advice if I want to go on a little road trip to check it out?

KAREN SCHONAUER: Well, you're going to be travelling on to a road that's maintained by the cottagers, and then onto a private lane to get there. So it's not accessible because it's private.

CO: So would your message to me be don't come?

KS: Don't come. Stay away. [CO laughing]

CO: Okay. So when did you realize that you had a problem on your hands with people trying to get to Heart Lake?

KS: We started to notice last summer. But this summer, it has got crazy. And the fall colours have brought them out even more.

CO: When you say crazy, what? Describe it for us?

KS: People coming and going on tour, using our driveway, parking in the middle of the driveway so we can't get in and out. Some of them have been rude about it. On people's docks, looking at a total different lake. They're down by people's private cottages. My brother and them have a hunting camp there, and we're lucky enough to have it on the water, and they're just all over.

CO: You mentioned the people use the docks, which they're not on Heart Lake, are they? I’m looking at an aerial photo. They are on the next lake, which is Mosque Lake, which is the one you're on, is that right?

KS: That's right. That's right. The people are on the docks of another lake.

CO: [chuckling] And do you tell them that's not even Heart Lake?

KS: We've told many people, and we've asked them to leave. And, yes, they get rude about it.

CO: What do they say to you?

KS: Well, like we don't have to move. This is like beautiful. And my brother told them like a week ago you’s gotta get out of here. I don't park in your doorstep. Don't park in mine.

CO: Some of them have traveled a long way, I guess, eh?

KS: A long ways. This summer, there was somebody had traveled from Sudbury and from North Bay. And they're coming from Toronto. And I'm sure the Ottawa area. And no doubt, because when you see this picture in in the air, it's beautiful. But that's just it. That's where the beauty ends.

CO: And what does it look like if you actually went down, if you went into to this area? It’s in Crown land, right? So if you took people down to Heart Lake, what would they actually see?

KS: To me, they’re looking at a beaver pond [dry laugh]. It's very hard to distinguish a heart standing on land. There's nothing but brush around the water, lily pads in it.

CO: How are they then getting these pictures?

KS: They're drones. They're using drones. This past summer, on our summer holidays, we were in there for two weeks. And the drones would come right down and hover over our actual cottage and back up. And they're being taken by drones. There was three or four drones in there on my brother a week ago. They're loud, they're noisy, they get in your face. That's private property. They're invading privacy.

CO: So it's one thing to have insects invading your space [laughing].

KS: Yeah, that's right. You know, and yes, because it is on Crown land, but there's no public access to that.

CO: Why are they so desperate to get at it? What are they telling you they want to do with this?

KS: Mid-September, there was a group went in, and they told one of the camp owners where my family owns that there's 143,000 followers of Heart Lakes in Ontario. So I don't know if it this is a group that's got started, and it is beautiful, and the way it was posted was a nice little dirt road drive out there, you know? Yeah, sure, but they're coming on to private property.

CO: There's one online article says that this lake is a, quote, ridiculously adorable date idea. And an incredibly unique place to propose.

KS: Now isn’t that nice. I don't even see all these posts [laughing].

CO: Well, what you see is your beaver pond. Now, what other concerns do you have about people wandering into those woods?

KS: Well, for one, it's a big bush. People are going to get lost if they don't know their way. It is huge bush. And another is in our hunting seasons, hunting is not a dangerous by no means. But it's dangerous when you have people trekking around in the bush that don't respect the hunters.

CO: Are the people hunting around Heart Lake?

KS: Well yah, because my dad's hunting camp and that is that's where the property is. It's like you know we use it as a cottage hunting camp.

CO: Yikes! And have you warned people about that as well?

KS: Well, last weekend, my brother like threw people out, and said it is hunting season. You people are down in here, you’s don't even like have the right to be in here, and it's hunting season. Like, it's not a safe thing to be doing when you are not protected for hunting — wearing orange, you know? Beople knowing where you are.

CO: Now, some of the pictures I can see a fair bit of Beaver activity has gone on there, so it's possible maybe that the shape might change completely if the beavers get more busy.

KS: Well, absolutely. You don't know. The beavers are just doing their job.

CO: Maybe you can make an arrangement with them.

KS: [deep laughter] Maybe.

CO: Okay, but what's your message to people who might hear this interview and now say oh, I want to go there.

KS: Don't come. It's not a tourist area.

CO: Okay, Karen. We'll get the word out.

KS: Okay. Thank you very much for your help.

CO: Thanks, Karen.

KS: Thank you. Bye.

CO: Bye.

CH: Karen Schonauer owns a cottage near Heart Lake. Please: don't go looking for it. We reached her in the nearby town of Coxvale, Ontario.

[Music: Ambient]

Boris on Bercow

SOUNDCLIP

JOHN BERCOW: Orderrrrrrr. Oderrr. Don’t gesticulate. Don’t rant. Spare us the theatrics. Behave yourself. Be a good boy, young man. Be a good boy.

CH Just a few of John Bercow's greatest hits. As the U.K. flailed through years of debate over Brexit, the sonorous-voiced House of Commons Speaker tried, and sometimes succeeded, in keeping a semblance of order in the chamber. Today, Mr. Bercow presided over Prime Minister's Questions for one last time. And although he made no friends among the government benches, Prime Minister Boris Johnson rose to pay tribute to him.

SOUNDCLIP

BORIS JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, I know the whole house will want to join me in recording that after ten tumultuous years, this is your last Prime Minister's Questions. And as befits a distinguished former Wimbledon competitor, you have sat up there in your high chair, not just as a commentator, offering your own opinions on the rallies you are watching. Sometimes, sir, they can sometimes kindly. But above all, as a player in your own right. Peppering every part of the chamber with your own thoughts and opinions, like some tennis ball machine — some uncontrollable tennis ball machine, Mr. Speaker. [laughing in the background] Delivering a series of literally unplayable, unreturnable, formerly unreturnable bullies and smashes. And although we may disagree about some of the legislative innovations that you have favoured, there is no doubt in my mind that you have been a great servant of this Parliament, and of this House of Commons.

CH: U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson. yyou might imagine Speaker Bercow expressing some relief at being able to finally shed his robes. But it ended up being an emotional goodbye. Here is John Bercow bidding farewell, after his last time presiding over Prime Minister's Questions today.

SOUNDCLIP

JB: Just before we proceed with a number of statements that need to be made, I would like to thank the prime minister and colleagues for their kind and generous personal remarks — which are greatly appreciated. I want to thank staff of mine — past and present — who have given of their time to be here today for the last Prime Minister's Question that I chair. All of them are people who've worked with me for a significant period of time. We've had fantastic relations and a terrific bond. nd I hugely appreciate the fact that they've Bothered to turn up on this occasion and in particular, yeah, and I want to thank my wife, Sally, and our three children Oliver, Freddie, and Jemima, for the support, stoicism, and fortitude which they've displayed through thick and thin over the last decade. I'll never forget it, and I'll always be grateful for it.

[Applause]

CH: That was John Bercow, Speaker of the U.K. House of Commons, speaking today on his second last day on the job.

[Music: Ambient]

CIA Halloween

CH: I don't know about you, but nothing gets me in the Halloween spirit like...a new five-point plan from a United States federal government agency. So thankfully, with only one more sleep before the big night, the Central Intelligence Agency has blessed trick-or-treaters with its essential Halloween how-to guide. On Sunday, the CIA tweeted, quote, "Need some last-minute advice to make a costume so good, no one will recognize you? Check out these five tips to remain incognito this Halloween!" Unquote. Now, we're not talking oversized trenchcoats and fake moustaches. Kids won't learn how to hack their parents' Amazon account to order the perfect costume. It's all much more subtle, helpful, and sinister than that. The agency gives it to the kids straight. Quote, "When we think about costumes, we usually imagine something funny or scary. They often involve unique or bizarre makeup and clothing. "Disguises, on the other hand, are made with the sole purpose of hiding someone's true identity ... Disguises, unlike costumes, are made to be as BORING as possible." Unquote. The guide suggests kids wear nondescript and adaptable clothing. It warns them to be aware of any "giveaways" like nail-biting and other idiosyncratic traits. In conclusion, like their officers, kids should be, quote, "looking for something that will allow them to disappear into the crowd." Unquote. Now listen, no doubt the CIA is listening to us try to unpack their bizarre PR stunt. But for the sake of Halloween, let's hope the kids aren't listening too. That would be a blessing in disguise.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

October 30, 2019 episode transcript

More Stories Like This