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 November 26, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Daemon Fairless

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello. I'm Carol Off.

DAEMON FAIRLESS: Good evening. I'm Damon Fearless. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

DF: Tonight...

CO: French exit. Yesterday failed Conservative candidates in Quebec gave their leader a serious talking to -- and tonight, one of them says Andrew Scheer needs a successor if the party is to succeed.

DF: Mission to mars-upial. The koala population suffered serious losses in the Australian bushfires in August and our guest says that's the latest disaster that has rendered the animals functionally extinct.

CO: We who hesitate are lost. In a new report the United Nations finds out united procrastination on climate change has cost us and it will cost us a lot more if we don't take drastic action immediately.

DF: Justice delayed. In 2009, dozens of people were massacred in the Philippines, 32 of them journalists, and now a verdict is finally expected.

CO: Pretty healthy robbery haul -- or, as they call it in Germany, "gesundheist." Thieves steal priceless, irreplaceable jewels from a museum in Dresden through a combo of careful planning and brute force.

DF: And hoop spins eternal. Somehow a Chicago woman kept a hula hoop rolling around her hips for 100 hours -- and tonight, she'll explain her revolutionary achievement. As It Happens. The Tuesday Edition. Radio that's concerned she contains some kind of industrial waist.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: 'He's not the guy': A Quebec Tory candidate on why he thinks Andrew Scheer must go

Quebec conservatives: Scheer

Guest: Maikel Mikhael

DF: Andrew Scheer is on a cross-country listening tour and he's getting an earful. The federal Conservative leader was in Quebec yesterday, a province where the Tories performed poorly in last month's election. In a closed door meeting, Mr. Scheer got some tough feedback from Quebec candidates on his performance in that election and on his future in the party. Maikel Mikhael was at the meeting. He ran in last month's election as the Conservative candidate in the riding of Riviere-des-Mille-lles, and you lost. We reached him in Saint-Eustache.

CO: Mr. Mikhael what message did you have for Andrew Scheer at his meeting yesterday?

MAIKEL MIKHAEL: The message that I had personally was he's not the guy for the job. What he brought during the elections, the result that we got, was the furthest that we could go with him.

CO: And so what do you think went wrong in your view?

MM: There are a few things that went wrong to be honest with you I felt that. Concerning the communication team -- they thought that they were prepared or maybe the plan that they had gave them the assurance that they were prepared. But in fact, they completely didn't deliver the merchandise. Also, what went wrong is that we saw that certain things were staged or prepared or mishandled instead of going naturally with the flow.

CO: Going back to yesterday, what other messages? Other people -- what did they say about Andrew Scheer? I guess he was there. What did they say to him?

MM: There was one of my colleague that brought the fact that he should leave before Christmas. And if we stick to the facts that we were playing against three teams that didn't have any goalkeeper and weren't able to hit the target -- were not able to score against those three teams. So we didn't deliver. One thing also that went wrong during the campaign is that I constantly had to defend my leader. During my door to door, people were asking me about Andrew Scheer -- "Oh why this? Oh why that? What is his position on certain social issues?" And I had to constantly defend him. A role of the leader is to bring his team up and he was just dragging us down constantly.

CO: What were the social issues they were saying where does he stand on that? What things specifically were they concerned about?

MM: A lot of Canadians heard about abortion and same sex marriage. These are things that constantly were dragging us down.

CO: In Quebec?

MM: In Quebec.

CO: Was there a pretty strong message from many people that they wanted him to go?

MM: There was a strong message. Definitely. And of course, certain candidates were afraid of change and they preferred to stay with him. But personally, he's not the guy. And if he doesn't understand that message, it's probably going to show a certain lack of leadership because being a leader you have to understand that certain times hard decisions have to be taken.

CO: So if he doesn't step down as leader, it's more evidence that he's not a leader?

MM: It could show a lack of leadership. Yes.

CO: Now, this idea that this you were playing to an open net -- you know this was the party, that Liberals did have a majority. What's the evidence that it was winnable for the Conservatives?

MM: The thing is that we were prepared to win this election. We were campaigning more than a year ago. We had our candidates ready. And we could have hit the goal on all the stumbles that the Liberal Party did. And we were seeing the NDP crashing. And the Bloc Quebecois almost disappeared. But now, with all the situations that were brought up directly to Andrew Scheer, we weren't able to score. The party wasn't able to reach the target.

CO: And Bloc Quebecois won in your riding. You came in fourth though. So do you think it's not possible that maybe the other candidates just ran better campaigns than you did?

MM: What I can say is that I had good support at the beginning and then slowly towards the vote I saw my supporters go lower and lower and lower in percentage. And what we noticed is that we had supporters that we called back two weeks before to vote and they were saying, sorry, we're not supporting you anymore. We saw this trend.

CO: And you believe it was Mr. Scheer who dragged you down?

MM: Absolutely. Absolutely.

CO: You know, the Conservative Party is -- all kinds of conservatives from progressivism one side to hard-right conservatives to Tories to all kinds of different movements all got pulled into this big tent. I mean, is it not possible Mr. Scheer was trying to be all things to all people? He was trying to keep this party together, and that it is actually maybe not possible to do so.

MM: Absolutely. And this is something that was brought up also yesterday is that the party needs to realign its position. Are we going to be more on the progressive side? Are we going to be more centered? Where do we want to stand with our new leader? And this is something that we have to decide very fast because the elections could happen anytime.

CO: Is it your sense that people, Conservatives in Quebec -- within the party -- would like to take it in the progressive direction?

MM: This is what I personally felt. We should go more on the progressive side and rally as many people as we can together to bring this movement forward.

CO: But, you know, on the other side, you have social conservatives who wanted Mr. Scheer to be even more vocal on the issue of abortion and gay marriage. So he disappointed them because he wasn't strong enough. So how do you pull all those people together? How would any leader do that?

MM: The whole idea is to represent what Canadians want. If somebody wants to become a prime minister, he wants to represent as many people as he can. You don't want to be a leader of a minority. You want to be the leader of the majority. You want to bring people together. You don't want to divide them. And what we're seeing right now is a country that is completely divided between the east and the west and the Maritimes. It's going to be harsh, but the whole concept is to bring people together instead of dividing them.

CO: What does it say to you that nobody seems to be shy about telling us how much they want Mr. Scheer to go?

MM: We don't have a lot of time. So what we want to do is we want to get things together. We want to get things done. We want to stick to the facts and we want to bring results. That's why what we're doing right now is probably drastic, but it's because we're aiming on concrete results.

CO: One of the people working on the campaign said that to work for Mr. Scheer -- to be his chief of staff -- would be like becoming the captain on the Titanic after it hit the iceberg. Those kinds of remarks being made. Why do you think Mr. Scheer doesn't step down? Why does he hold on?

MM: I don't know what he's holding onto. Yesterday, he didn't express a lot of material. He was here to listen. He gave a few points forms on certain aspects that were unclear. But he didn't give us his point of view or he didn't say I'm staying because of that right now. So right now he lost all the moral authority that he had. And it's going to be impossible to win back to back Quebec.

CO: Mr. Mikhael I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

MM: It was a pleasure.

DF: Maikel Mikhael is a former Conservative candidate in Quebec. We reached him in Saint-Eustache. For more on this story, check out our webpage: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Climate change report

Guest: Inger Andersen

DF: Procrastinate, and we pay the price. World leaders have been putting off the changes needed to cut global emissions for years. Now, according to a new United Nations report, urgent and ambitious action is needed to stave off the worst effects of climate change. The report warns of catastrophic fallout unless greenhouse gas emissions are cut by 7.6 percent each year starting next year. That will require unprecedented changes. Emissions have risen about 1.5 percent each year over the past decade. Inger Andersen is the executive director of the UN Environment Program. We reached her in Geneva.

CO: Ms. Andersen, first of all, how would you characterize the picture that this report paints?

INGER ANDERSEN: Well, the picture tells us essentially the gap between greenhouse gas emissions, where we are heading to versus where we should be. And the pictures tells us that that gap is not closing. Had we done in 2010 what we said we were going to do or what we were advised to do, then we would only have to reduce emissions by 3.3 percent per year. At this point, if we are to land safely, we have to reduce our carbon emissions at 7.6 percent a year. And that is a drastic reduction. And that's why it is all the more important that countries now lean in.

CO: But the report indicates that global temperatures are actually on a pace to rise as much as almost 4 degrees Celsius. I mean, the opposite trend is happening, right?

IA: Yes. At this point, without action, temperatures are set to rise 3.2 Celsius above the pre-industrial levels. So way above the 2 degrees that we have in the Paris Accord, and certainly above what the world's scientists consider safe at 1.5. So, yes, this is not a good picture.

CO: What are the consequences we're now headed for?

IA: If we were to hit 1.5, which is a very optimistic scenario at this point, 70 percent of all coral reefs will die. At 2 degrees, about all coral reefs -- I mean, 99 percent...everything is lost. The Arctic Ocean is likely to be sea ice free once per century, at 1.5 degrees or every 10 years at 2 degrees. So at 3.2 degrees, that's a scenario that we cannot even fathom. That is where large tracts of our planet, terrestrial surface, becomes uninhabitable. That's where harvests will fail. That's where we will see impossibility of survival in many regions and therefore movements of people. What this report tells us that we absolutely must take action now -- and these actions are entirely in our hands. It is about decarbonisation. It is about dealing with transport: air, sea, and land. And it certainly is about the way we build our cities. But it's also about investing in nature because biomass can absorb carbon. And during this 10 year period where we are going to slow, where we must slow down our carbon emissions -- we have nature as a friend. The more we invest in forest restoration and forest protection, the better we will be. At this point, clearly this is a wakeup call because we are not heading in that direction.

CO: I don't know how many times now I've heard that this is a wakeup call and we don't seem to be waking up. And in our own country, there is a strong support among the population for action on climate change. And yet we just learned that Canada is one of the bottom three countries set to meet its targets. We are not on course to do so. If Canada is not up to the task, what's happening elsewhere?

IA: Well, the report paints a picture of everybody needing to lean in. And certainly the G20 countries have a special role to play because we have emissions -- from that group of 20 -- that is about 76 percent of the total emissions in the world. Now, a number of countries have taken action and are taking action. And I very much want to underline that Canada's actions so far have been admirable. What we are seeing now because of the fact that these actions have only started now and not in 2010 when we would have liked them to start, therefore, we need to turn up on the actions.

CO: Canada's percentage of overall emissions is not very high, but its per capita emissions are among the highest in the world. The United States is withdrawing from the Paris Accord, and the president says they're going to -- and they're returning to fossil fuel burning. China's cut its clean energy projects in half. So where can you find optimism if the big emitters are not moving in this direction?

IA: I guess in my business you have to be an eternal optimist because otherwise we would not be able to continue in sustaining what we're trying to do here. But at this point, what causes me to be optimistic is that we see a majority of many people in many countries indeed leaning in on climate and demanding this from their governments or from their local governments. And in the US, which you mention as an example, we have a number of states that have committed -- and we have a large number of businesses that are doing and leaning in on this.

CO: But you know, now that if this is the case, we have to ramp this up, then the kinds of changes we'll have to make in our societies are far more dramatic. Do you think politicians are up to the task? In Canada we know there's a lot of pressure right now to help their country's struggling oil and gas industry. Do you think that politicians can actually face this reality that you're describing and meet those goals?

IA: I mean, I'm aware -- and I can't speak to Canadian politics -- but I'm aware that politicians at times tend to have a limited time horizon of the next electoral cycle. I would hope that politicians will understand what is on their shoulders right now in terms of securing our planet as we know it. Those small islands in the Pacific that disappear, that is [inaudible] the first. So we need to understand that every single citizens on this planet will be impacted and affected and their lives will be impacted by climate change. So foresight, full and wise politicians would do well to understand the science, understand the facts. We're going to the 25th COP. That means 25 years of science creating a track record of knowledge and insight. I do understand, obviously, that it is critical that we don't leave people behind, people who are in the hydrocarbon sector. However, we do need to find a way out of the climate catastrophe or the climate emergency, I should say, that we are heading towards.

CO: Ms. Andersen I'm glad you keep looking for these little slivers of optimism. It sounds awfully despairing. It must be very difficult. I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

IA: My pleasure. Thank you.

DF: Inger Andersen is the executive director of the U.N. Environment Program. She's in Geneva.

[Music]

Hula hooping record

Guest: Jenny Doan

SOUNDCLIP

[Music: Queen - We Are The Champions]

[Group counting down: 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 -- everybody cheers and applauds]

DF: That was the moment this past weekend that Jenny Doan set the record for marathon hula hooping -- 100 hours. Over more than four days at a Chicago bar, Ms. Doan almost continuously kept that hula hoop spinning around her hips. She was out to beat the Guinness World Record. She annihilated it by 25 hours. That does still need to be verified by Guinness. We reached Jenny Doan in Chicago.

CO: Jenny, congratulations.

JENNY DOAN: Thank you so much.

CO: How are your hips?

JD: Hips aren't too bad. My legs and feet though are a completely different story. [Laughs]

CO: What's happening there?

JD: Yeah. So with me standing for so long gravity pushed all the like fluid in my legs south. And so in the past like three days I've lost about six pounds or three kilograms in just liquid. So that has been very uncomfortable. But it makes going to work much much easier.

CO: But you do have marks on your waistline, right?

JD: Yeah. So with the friction on the hoop -- so previously I'd trained up to 50 hours of hula hooping and around the 60 hour mark with the heat going on in the brewery which was the venue I picked, there was so much heat and there was sweat and just so much mess that I began to get chafing on the right side, which then became the left hand side. And then for the rest of the remaining 40 or so hours, I just had the shirt in between as the only barrier preventing further damage there.

CO: Yikes. So why on earth did you want a hula hoop for 100 hours?

JD: Yeah. So I always wanted a Guinness World Record. And so I set a date to get it before I was 30 -- which happens next year. And so when I passed my birthday in August this year, I decided to put pen to paper and write down a schedule and then just commit to it. And so I found hula hooping to be interesting because it's something that doesn't require a lot of money to learn. And when I saw footage of the previous record holder, I noticed his technique is a lot different to mine and I was pretty confident that I could do even better. And with the fun of the sport, I knew that a lot of people could get behind me, enjoy the event as much as I did, and get something out of it. So those are like my main motivations.

CO: Okay, so the previous record holder, Aaron Hibbs of Columbus, Ohio -- he hula hooped for 74 four hours and 54 minutes. You went for 100 hours. Why? Why didn't you just go for 76 hours or 75 hours and 5 minutes? Why the extra 25 hours?

JD: Yeah. There's a part of my personality that is a bit obsessive [laughs] and I don't really believe in half measures. So if I was going to train for that long, I wanted to really cement the record in there and I wanted to make sure that the next person that went, for the record would have to pay tribute to both Aaron and myself. And fully understand what 100 hours feels like.

CO: Hula hooping -- lots of people do it for about a minute and then they drop it. But did you drop it? Did it slip out of your waist area and hit the ground?

JD: Yes. There's like a kind of a confusing component to some of the mechanics of the marathon event. So the gist of it is for every continuous hour, you get a five minute break so you can save that up and use it up for later. So during the event, I always had extra time saved up in my pocket just in case for example, if somebody came over and knocked the hoop out -- I could call a rest break, recuperate and go on from there. So there was a time where I did take an earlier than expected rest break, but then I was able to recover and move on from there.

CO: And you did get a sleep at some point, right?

JD: Oh, yes. So with a lot of that rest being saved up in the first three days, I saved up enough rest so that I could have a 40 minute nap twice a day. And then in between that, I had to just continue to bank up as much rest as possible so that I didn't use it unless I absolutely had to.

CO: So for more than four days and nights you did that. I mean, was there a moment -- was there a dark moment where you thought, "I can't do it?"

JD: Yeah, it was definitely hour-96. And so towards the end every time there was a countdown towards the hour just to sort of make it interesting they do a count down from ten. And when they counted down, they said 96. I just started crying because I was in so much pain that I couldn't bear another four hours of it. And so my housemates were both there and they were trying to like coach me through it, like "why are you crying?" And I was just like -- there is a recording, that I've taking a snippet of -- but the gist of it I think I was saying, "what if I can't do it?" Even though it already passed 75. At the time, I had so much like desire to get 100 that if I didn't get it -- at the time it felt like it was a crushing failure. And so there was a lot of like very intense eye contact between my housemate and I. As she was trying to keep my eyes awake and then just focus on her rather than focus on the pain and the desire to quit.

CO: It looks like somebody maybe handed you a purple popsicle at some point. [Laughter] Did that lift your spirits?

JD: [Laughter] Yeah. So I forgot that being in a temperature controlled place that it can be so drying and so that makes it really difficult to eat and drink. And so having like a popsicle or an icy cola every once in a while was just like the combination of cooling down and sugar because if you sort of stayed in the background like I'm wearing a singlet towards the end because I'm so sweaty and everyone else around me is wearing like a down jacket and like a beanie because the place is so cold. [Laughs] So there was just this strange sort of disconnect between what was happening in my world and reality.

CO: Well, I say congratulations. You've done it. Your roommates got you through it and you deserve a rest. I hope your feet, the swelling goes down.

JD: Yeah. Yeah. I'll be eager to go back to my normal form. [Laughs]

CO: Take care Jenny.

JD: All righty. Thank you so much.

DF: Jenny Doan beat a world record this past weekend by hula hooping for a 100 hours. We reached her in Chicago.

[Music]

Albert Heijn

DF: Niels Waas wanted to be a team player. As he told the Dutch newspaper NRC, quote, "At first I thought it was cool because we are the first to wear new clothing. But when my mother took a picture of me in underwear, it felt a bit strange." Sure, it feels strange when you're in your briefs and your mom is behind the camera. But it's even stranger when you're both doing the photo session on your employer's orders. Niels Waas works for Albert Heijn, the biggest supermarket chain in the Netherlands. Recently, the chain started a pilot project at Mr. Waas's location in Nijmegen. All staff would get new uniforms. But to make sure those uniforms fit perfectly, the company asked employees to upload a photo of themselves to a particular app. A poster for employees read, quote, "Wear underwear or close fitting sportswear to be able to measure the contours of your body as well as possible. And ask someone to help you take the photos." When NRC contacted Albert Heijn about this bizarre request, a spokesperson explained the complex thinking behind it, quote, "We don't want anyone to wear too large or too small clothing." Okay. But the problem was that they wanted their employees to wear too little clothing. And when the news got out, the supermarket canceled the project. No underwear shots. Now, staff can just, you know, send their measurements. Maybe that's more complicated, but it's obviously better than the stripped down approach.

[Music]

Part 2: Philippines journalist says reporters still 'an open target' as he awaits verdict for 2009 massacre

Koalas in trouble

Guest: Deborah Tabart

DF: The bush fires that charred parts of Australia mean trouble for everyone, but could spell disaster for the koala. Dramatic videos shared by volunteers fighting the flames show the marsupials desperate for help as fire engulfs their treetop homes. The Australian Koala Foundation says the fires, along with droughts and deforestation, have left koalas, quote, "functionally extinct." Although other experts say that overstates the threat to their species. Deborah Tabart is the chairman of the Australian Koala Foundation. We reached her in Brisbane.

CO: Mr. Tabart what impact have these bush fires had on koalas?

DEBORAH TABART: Well, I think that everyone in the world has seen the images of koalas coming in burnt, and that marvelous rescue by that woman who ran into the bush to rescue Lewis -- who was put down yesterday. He didn't survive it. I think the worrying thing is that only 31 koalas have come into the hospital in Port Macquarie and they're estimating that 350 koalas have probably died in that part of the bush. What I did yesterday was I got our scientists to evaluate how much bush has burned in New South Wales -- and it is 1-million-650-thousand hectares -- which is probably 3-million acres. And not all of that will be koala habitat. Over the coming days, we will try and assess how many animals we think have died in those fires.

CO: At this point, you don't have an estimate as to what you think has happened to the koala population.

DT: I have got an estimate but I want to be more accurate and we'll do those figures in the next couple of days. But what I can say is that I think this has decimated New South Wales. And we were donated about a thousand acres earlier this year and that has burnt and gone up. I think it's unprecedented. I don't think any of us -- and I've been in my job 30 years and I'm in my 60s, I have never seen fires like this.

CO: You on your website say that koalas are "functionally extinct." What do you mean by that?

DT: And I have been in trouble for that. There some people who've come out against me on that. But the amount of habitat in Australia is 20 percent of that continent. And over these 30 years, I've pretty much been everywhere. And earlier this year, I did a very extensive drive through these areas which are now on fire. And the scary thing was all the river systems are dry. I think that everyone in Australia now has to focus on water. Koalas need trees that are on healthy river systems. And I don't believe that there are any populations that I've seen in my whole career that are safe. What I do know is that scientists and even the ones who work for me can often be too cautious and go well you know -- the IUCN, for instance, has challenged me and said, well, we think there's 300,000 koalas. Well, I'm going to tell them if you can show me 300,000 koalas -- go right ahead. But we believe it's less than 80,000. And let's say we lose 10,000 out of that population -- that is a significant decline. And our government is just paralysed and doesn't seem to be doing anything.

CO: But when you say "functionally extinct" -- what does that term mean? What are you saying?

DT: Well, one of our scientists yesterday said when a species cannot fulfill its ecological niche -- you know, like eating food, putting nutrients back into the soil. But the nicest and easiest suggestion that I've been told is a koala living in the landscape today may have a Joey and that baby model, that Joey might have a Joey -- but chances are the third one won't be born. And it doesn't matter what any scientist says to me, I've driven this landscape for 30 years and I know the koalas is in trouble.

CO: And the scientists who are pushing back on what your claim -- not because they don't believe that the koalas are in trouble. I mean, there is no question on what you're seeing and what you're describing. But what they're saying is that when you use a term that suggests that they're doomed, that this is a population that is beyond the point of return, that in fact that's an exaggeration and that the koalas are actually not doomed.

DT: Well let me tell you -- what I want to say to those scientists of the world is go and see your local politician and tell them that they have to take the precautionary approach. I am so sick of scientists arguing. I'm so sick of them saying I've got one more document that's going to save this planet. I want a koala protection act. I want it now. And I will not take the responsibility of implying that the koalas are doomed. Every day of my life I speak for those animals and the bush that I love. And it is time for our political leaders all around the world to take the heat that this planet is in serious trouble.

CO: I mean, I think that is unfair to other scientists to think that they don't share that with you. They are very concerned. But I think what you're hearing...

DT: Then then go pick on the politicians. Don't pick on me. I believe the koala is functionally extinct. They can prove to me I'm wrong. If the controversy means that I get to talk to your listeners, great -- bring it on. Because I would rather those scientists actually gathering together and saying the koala is in trouble. What can we do about it? The koala was listed under federal laws in 2012 -- there was supposed to be a recovery plan. There's been repeated meetings of scientists and everyone like "what'll we do?" "What'll we do?" And now it takes fires of this magnitude, which could go on burning for months, to come up with solutions. Don't pick on me about a term that you created in the first place.

CO: Their argument is that if you exaggerate for an effect, the one you've described, if that's what it takes to have people wake up, then you're going to. Is there a threat, a problem, of you losing credibility? Isn't that something that...

DT: Look honestly -- and I appreciate you pushing the point -- I haven't exaggerated. I believe the koala is functionally extinct. I'm standing by this. And I believe that if I was the prime minister, I could put things in place. And the first thing would be legislation that stops our industries taking the water at about river systems, that developers have to have constraints on them. I'm not exaggerating the situation at all. I am incredibly concerned. And after 31 years in my job, I have a duty of care to tell the world what I think.

CO: Okay. When I say exaggeration -- I'll just be clear, they're saying that the numbers that you're giving, that to call them "functionally extinct" is an exaggeration. And that's what has come from the scientific community.

DT: On our website we have a map that says how many koalas we think. And the other people can say they've got 300,000 koalas. I haven't seen them. And most of the people who've said that rarely are in the bush. I am in the bush every day.

CO: Mr. Tabart I appreciate how awful it must be to see what you're seeing in those fires. And I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

DT: Thank you very much for your time.

DF: Deborah Tabart is the chairman of the Australian Koala Foundation. She's known as "Koala Woman." We reached her in Brisbane.

[Music]

Grey Cup Champions Way

SOUNDCLIP

[Crowd cheering]

DF: That is the sound of a party decades in the making. Today in Winnipeg, thousands took to the streets in celebration of the Blue Bombers winning the Grey Cup for the first time in 29 years. The energy was electric as the players carried the cup along the parade route in front of ecstatic fans. After the parade, Winnipeg Mayor Brian Bowman took the stage to say a few words.

SOUNDCLIP

BRIAN BOWMAN: I'm going to keep this short and sweet. I want to say a special thank you to every member of this team for showing the grit and the passion that Winnipeggers demonstrated each and every day. We are so proud of you. We want to say thank you and let's do this again really soon.

[Crowd cheers]

BRIAN BOWMAN: Last but not least, I want to give a special shout out to the Winnipeggers on this team. Give it up.

[Crowd cheers[

BRIAN BOWMAN: I'm talking about Thomas Miles -- linebacker. I'm talking about Nic Demski -- wide receiver. And MVP! Andrew Harris! Come on up.

[Crowd cheers: MVP]

BRIAN BOWMAN: I want to announce today a very special presentation, starting this week I'm thrilled to announce we are renaming with an honorary street, naming Chancellor Matheson Avenue from Pembina Highway to University Crescent -- Honorary "Grey Cup Champions Way!"

DF: That was Winnipeg Mayor Brian Bowman speaking today after the Grey Cup parade.

[Music]

Philippines massacre trial

Guest: Nonoy Espina

DF: It remains the world's single deadliest day for journalists. 10 years ago in the Philippines, a group of political activists and reporters was intercepted on their way to register a candidate in a local gubernatorial election. They were dragged from their cars and murdered. 58 bodies were recovered. Many of them badly mutilated. 32 of the victims were journalists -- whose presence had been intended to deter violence. In the days and weeks that followed, more than 100 suspects were arrested, including many members of a rival political family: the Ampatuans. Now, a decade later, convictions are finally expected in the case. Nonoy Espina is the president of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines. He was supposed to have been part of the journalist's convoy that morning. We reached Mr. Espina in Manila.

CO: Nonoy I know that you narrowly escaped being a victim in this massacre. What's it like for you to finally be anticipating a verdict?

NONOY ESPINA: It's been 10 years. Just the fact that it had to take a decade to get a verdict -- it speaks a lot about our justice system. And our system of governance that you have to wait a decade to get justice for something like this.

CO: How difficult has it been actually to mount any kind of a prosecution against those believed responsible?

NE: Actually, the defense depended so much on the wealth of the Ampatuans. You can just imagine there were a 197 accused originally. Each of them would file petitions for bail and a motion here and a motion there. And the judge would have to hear everyone. And so that's why it took so long. In fact, the lawyers were saying that the way the case was file, it was designed to fail. And in this case, witnesses were murdered, they were threatened, and there were lots of attempts to bribe them.

CO: You mentioned the Ampatuans -- the senior members of this family, they wanted to hold onto power in this region where the massacre happened. It's believed that members of their -- they had a private militia -- senior (family members) are the ones accused of the murder.

NE: Yes, that's right. And, you know, this was a family that had practically absolute powers. Their private army was, in fact, the larger and better armed than the regular army. And it's ironic because Maguindanao up to now remains one of the poorest provinces in the country -- but the Ampatuans were among the wealthy Filipinos at the time.

CO: We know that they were 32 journalists who were killed that day -- who were murdered. And you were supposed to join the convoy. What do you remember of that day in 2009?

NE: Me and a friend were already in Maguindanao. We had been covering the fighting between government and rebels. And knowing the reputation of the Ampatuans we actually decided to cancel our flight and stay. But I was coming down with the flu so we said we just go to Manila and then fly back. A couple of days later, I was firing up my PC when I got a text on my phone saying, "Convoy missing." It didn't occur to me that anything bad had happened because there are a lot of, you know, military checkpoints in that province on the highways. So when I got the text, I thought they probably were held up at some checkpoint or other. But a couple of hours later, I got another text that said "Convoy found. Everyone dead." I felt my legs literally turned to jelly.

CO: Could you have ever imagined that there would be so many of your colleagues who would die just going to cover that story that day?

NE: No, I don't think anyone except probably number one is expected a massacre to happen. It broke a lot of taboos like in the area -- a lot of clan wars happened. But one of the inviolable rules is that women and children are spared the violence. In this case, no one was spared. It was quite a shocker for everyone.

CO: 10 years ago, after it happened we spoke with a local journalist you might know and I just want to play you a little clip from that interview and get you to respond.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: It's a day of mourning in the Philippines. Many media groups are blaming the government for the lack of protection to journalists. It's very difficult for us. Journalist in the Philippines live int this very small world. So this is beyond human comprehension. The loss of lives in a single day is really something that we cannot forget.

CO: That was from 10 years ago. Your colleague talking about that. And has anything really changed in 10 years -- under the Duterte government?

NE: Unfortunately, no. In fact, you could say things have taken a turn for the worse. In fact, when the massacre happened, we actually thought that the magnitude, the gravity of the crime would somehow jolt governments into acting. It didn't happen. And the thing is before we never ever accused the government of any policy of deliberately targeting journalists. Now under Duterte, state security officials have come out openly and called media 'enemy of the state.' The deputy armed forces chief claimed that the mainstream media was supposedly dominated by countries of the Communist Party. A lot of us have been on the receiving end lately of open accusations by government officials and military officials of being a suspected rebels. It is kind of scary because, you know, charges like that hanging in the air with no proof being presented -- it kind of leaves you as an open target. You never know where and when the attack is going to come from...if it comes.

CO: Given all that, how hopeful are you that you'll see any kind of a guilty verdict of members of the Ampatuan family?

NE: I'm pretty confident about a guilty verdict. There's no doubt in my mind that the principal suspects at least are going to be convicted. I simply cannot imagine how, for example, the three Ampatuan brothers are going to be acquitted. But if that happens, then I cannot imagine the consequence either.

CO: Nonoy I admire your courage for continuing in your profession in the Philippines. I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

NE: Thank you so much.

DF: Nonoy Espina is the president of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines. We reached him in Manila. 10 years ago this week, 58 people -- 32 of them journalists -- were killed in the Maguindanao massacre. A verdict is expected next month. And you can find more on this story on our website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Big Printer

DF: It was the biggest thing to ever hit the Irish legislature. And as soon as it did hit, the people who'd ordered it knew they had a problem. Last December, the legislature took possession of a very large, very expensive printer. 2.1 metres high, and 1.9 metres wide -- about seven feet by seven feet. And it cost 800,000 euros -- about 1.2-million dollars Canadian. So it was a big deal -- too big. As recent Freedom of Information request from the Irish Times has found, when it arrived it was too gigantic to go through the door. But the contract was signed, so they had to pay for it and put it in storage while they temporarily remove the door frames. Then the Office of Public Works informed the powers that be that that wouldn't cut it. Much more serious renovations would be required to get the behemoth indoors. In total, the huge printer was in stores for 10 months, which cost a fairly reasonable 12,000 euros. During those months, the Office of Public Works did 230,000 euros worth of work -- bringing the total cost for this high tech monstrosity to more than a million euros or around 1.5-million Canadian. Oh, and now that it's in, several members of the staff are refusing to use it until they get a raise. There will be an inquiry. But it's a pretty straightforward story. As with a lot of giant government projects, it was too big to not fail.

[Music]

Turkey Pardon

DF: Every year in the lead up to American Thanksgiving, people gather reluctantly at the White House for an event that incorporates pointless photo ops, a silly tradition, and dad jokes: the turkey pardon. But like so many things at the White House these days, this year's pardon was a little out of the ordinary. Joined by the first lady, President Donald Trump chose between two turkeys named "Bread and Butter" -- opting to spare the life of "Butter" and opting to work in some jokes about the impeachment hearings being led by Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff.

SOUNDCLIP

DONALD TRUMP: Thankfully, Bread and Butter have been especially raised by the Jacksons to remain calm under any condition, which will be very important because they've already received subpoenas to appear in Adam Schiff's basement on Thursday. [Laughter] It's true. Hundreds of people have. It seems that Democrats are accusing me of being too soft on turkey. But Bread and Butter, I should note that unlike previous witnesses, you and I have actually met. It's very unusual. Very unusual. In any event, I expect this pardon will be a very popular one with the media -- after all, turkeys are closely related to vultures. I don't know if I like that line, but there is a little truth to it.

DF: US President Donald Trump spared the life of a turkey named Butter in the White House Rose Garden today. He did not see fit to spare the rest of us his attempts at impeachment humor.

[Music]

Part 3: AggregateIQ report

AggregateIQ report

Guest: Daniel Therrien

DF: Amid the reporting on the Cambridge analytical data scandal, you might remember hearing the name of a Canadian company called "AggregateIQ." The Victoria based company has been involved with US political campaigns and the 2016 Brexit referendum. That work got the attention of BC's Information and Privacy Commissioner, and the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. Today, they jointly released a report on AggregateIQ. It says that the company, quote, "failed to meet its obligations under Canadian privacy laws when it used and disclosed the personal information of millions of voters in BC, the US, and the UK." Daniel Therrien is the federal privacy commissioner. We reached him in Vancouver.

CO: Mr. Therrien how do you believe that AggregateIQ failed to meet its obligations to Canadians?

DANIEL THERRIEN: Well AggregateIQ to remind your listeners is a data analytics company. They provided services to a number of politicians in the United Kingdom, in the United States, and also in Canada. We looked at their activities in relation to all of these campaigns. The worse examples in terms of consequences, I would say would be in relation to US elections.

CO: So what did they do wrong?

DANIEL THERRIEN: They use personal information, sensitive personal information, including psychological traits of individuals obtained through Facebook and a third party application to send messages, political messages, that a political campaign felt would be received well because of the psychological profiles of the individuals.

CO: What information did they gather about people? What was information they were trading in?

DANIEL THERRIEN: There was information coming from various sources. The official voter list in the United States. Information from commercial data brokers. But also information coming from a Professor Colgan who had an application on Facebook. And it is that information that included the psychological traits of individuals behavioral information and the like.

CO: Like their religion, their donations to political parties, their personal information, email addresses, things like that?

DANIEL THERRIEN: Yes. And their psychological makeup. For instance, whether somebody was somewhat anxious and amenable to certain messages.

CO: So when you say psychologically -- you don't mean just in data terms, you mean their actual temperament.

DANIEL THERRIEN: Yes.

CO: Last year when the company AggregateIQ testified before the Commons Privacy and Ethics Committee, they said -- this is a quote -- "We're not a big data company. We're not a data analytics company. We do not harvest or otherwise illegally obtained data. We never share information from one client another. And we're not a practitioner of the so-called digital dark arts." Is that true?

DANIEL THERRIEN: Well, what we found was that they created an informatics tool that ultimately led to micro targeted messages in the context of political campaigns. They populated that tool with various information, including the psychographic profiles that I've just described. And their tool allowed the segmentation of populations for micro targeting messages for political purposes. That's what we found.

CO: So they used our personal data in order to influence our opinions and our voting preferences, is that right?

DANIEL THERRIEN: In order to deliver messages that politicians felt would be effective in seeking support from these electors.

CO: And why does that matter?

DANIEL THERRIEN: It matters on a number of grounds. I think it matters from the integrity of elections perspective. But from my direct expertise, it matters because sensitive personal information was used without the consent of individuals for purposes that individuals never consented to. The electors may consented to engaging with a politician, with a party, with a candidate for a function or another. But they never consented to having their psychological profile used to try to convince them to vote one way or another.

CO: Now, this is key, isn't it? That nobody gave consent for this information to be used in any way?

DANIEL THERRIEN: Absolutely.

CO: And just one other connection. We heard from this whistleblower, Christopher Wylie, who said that the AggregateIQ was a franchise of Cambridge Analytica, which is a company under fire for using this kind of information, detailed information, about people. What relationship do they have? What relationship did AggregateIQ have to Cambridge Analytical?

DANIEL THERRIEN: A-IQ is a separate company based in Victoria, BC that offered and provided their technical expertise to Cambridge Analytica's parent company called SCL. That is the relationship between A-IQ and the Cambridge Analytica family of companies.

CO: Was there anything improper in that relationship?

DANIEL THERRIEN: No. They were providing services under a contract with another company. So that's proper. It is the nature of the service and the way in which personal information was inappropriately used and that we think offended privacy law.

CO: Did AggregateIQ break any laws?

DANIEL THERRIEN: They certainly broke privacy laws both provincially -- in British Columbia -- and the private sector federal law in Canada in two respects: the absence of consent that we have discussed and also because they did not securely protect the information of the individuals whose personal information they had.

CO: Could they be charged for that?

DANIEL THERRIEN: I don't think so. Certainly not under the law that we administer. What we can do is to recommend a change in practices. And they have agreed to comply with our recommendations. There is no authority under our law to fine or to make orders. And I do not believe this would be criminal conduct under our law.

CO: And this is something you have been pushing for, isn't it? That you would like to see changes in our laws that would reflect what is going on in the collection and the use of our personal information. What is missing in our law at this point to protect us from this?

DANIEL THERRIEN: What is missing is the company is an authority to make binding orders and to issue fines. A-IQ is not subject to fines in this case. And I also think that political parties that are currently unregulated federally should be subject to privacy laws as well. So we looked at the activities of a commercial entity A-IQ but we did not have any authority and no regulator has the authority to look at what political parties federally do with that information. And that is a huge gap in the law.

CO: All right. We'll be watching. Mr. Therrien I really appreciate you explaining this to us. Thank you.

DANIEL THERRIEN: Thank you.

DF: That was Federal Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien in Vancouver. In a statement to As It Happens, the CEO of AggregateIQ said, quote, "AggregateIQ was happy to cooperate fully with the commissioners." The statement continues, quote, "As the report confirms and as we told the commissioners long ago, we have already implemented all of the recommendations."

[Music]

Lee Anderson

DF: It seemed to be a fairly ordinary and fortunately friendly door-knocking encounter with a constituent. Lee Anderson, the Conservative Party candidate for the UK riding of Ashfield, was canvasing in Nottinghamshire the other day, accompanied by Daily Mail journalist Michael Crick. In one encounter, which Mr. Crick's team recorded, Mr. Anderson was fortunate enough to be greeted by a very supportive resident indeed.

SOUNDCLIP

LEE ANDERSON: Hi.

VOICE 1: Hi.

LEE ANDERSON: I am Lee Anderson -- your parliamentary candidate for the Conservative Party. How are you doing? I recognise you -- it is Steve isn't it?

VOICE 1: It is.

LEE ANDERSON: Yeah I recognized you. How are you doing mate? All right?

VOICE 1: Yes.

LEE ANDERSON: Just doing a bit of last minute campaigning. Are you going to be voting on Dec 12th and do you mind me asking me which way you are going to go this time?

VOICE 1: Well I am going with you. There is no way Labour is ever going to get my vote again.

DF: British politician Lee Anderson talking with an ostensibly random voter about his enthusiastic support for Mr. Anderson's Tory party. After that encounter, Daily Mail journalist Michael Crick tells Mr. Anderson it almost felt, quote, "set up for us." Turns out Mr. Crick was right. And his team can prove it -- thanks to Lee Anderson's lapel mic which was on when he phoned that very same constituent moments before knocking on his door.

SOUNDCLIP

LEE ANDERSON: Just make it out that you know who I am -- you know I'm the candidate, but not a friend. All right? I am at the car park -- have a quick look. Yeah. All right mate, I'll see you in a minute.

DF: British Conservative Party candidate Lee Anderson caught fabricating a door-knocking encounter with a supposedly supportive voter in an exchange recorded by the Daily Mail.

[Music]

German jewel heist

Guest: Christopher Marinello

DF: The room is dark. Two people enter, one with a flashlight -- illuminating the checkered floor. Then one of them takes an axe and smashes a display case. That combination of stuff and brutality plays out on CCTV footage released by police in Germany. It was recorded yesterday at the Green Vault Museum in Dresden. And it's the moment before thieves made off with priceless 18th century jewels. The state's interior minister has called the robbery a, quote, "attack on the cultural identity of all Saxons." Today, the hunt for the perpetrators continued. But Christopher Marinello worries it might be too late. He's the founder of Art Recovery International, which works to recover stolen, missing, or looted art. And we reached Mr. Marinello in London.

CO: Chris, for those who haven't seen the pictures that police have released of these stolen items, can you describe what they look like?

CHRISTOPHER MARINELLO: Well, they're absolutely beautiful 18th century pieces encrusted with diamonds -- with the large diamond in the middle and many diamonds all around. There's a sword also that's completely encrusted in diamonds and many beautiful pieces that are irreplaceable.

CO: Because these aren't things that you would go to a store and buy. There's not price tag -- these kinds of things are priceless, right?

CM: That's right. They're completely irreplaceable.

CO: Well, how does this art theft compare with others you've seen?

CM: There are the art thefts that take place when they actually steal paintings or sculptures. And generally speaking, after those types of thefts, we get calls for people who want to ransom the objects back or they're hoping an insurance company comes forward or you know they try to sell the items elsewhere in the world. This is different because it's jewelry. And in over 30 years of recovering artwork, I would say that only a handful of jewels have ever been recovered. And that's because it's so easy to melt down gold, pry stones out of settings, and recut the stones. And that's what thieves do. And unfortunately, we've seen a lot more of this type of jewelry theft. Violent smashing and grabbing and running.

CO: Your sense is that these objects, these artworks, these beautiful objects are no longer intact or soon not to be intact?

CM: Well, the first thing that criminals do when it's a jewelry theft is they try to hide their tracks. They don't want to be you know -- if they submitted these intact to an auction house, they would be spotted almost immediately or anywhere else in the world that has seen this story.

CO: How did this happen? I mean, how did they break into this museum? How did they get past the security system?

CM: Well, we see that they've managed to bend some iron bars that were in front of a window. And the CCTV camera images that they released are almost completely black. You can't make out. There's no light whatsoever. You can't make out any faces. So, you know, the museum, you know -- I don't want to criticize their security. And I think we're going to be evaluating their security in the weeks and months ahead. Right now, we really need to focus on getting these objects returned as quickly as possible before they get destroyed.

CO: But there seems to have been some kind of a power failure around the museum before it happened. Do you think that was a coincidence?

CM: It's a current investigation. So if I knew for sure, I wouldn't be able to comment anyway. But, you know, we've seen the reports that there was a fire -- the power at the museum had to be cut because of that fire. I don't know if these thieves were intelligent enough to actually plan that far in advance. If you saw the video and saw them hacking at the jewelry cases to get whatever they could possibly grab in their hands, you wouldn't think so.

CO: But do you think that it is an organized crime operation? Do you see anything similar that would lead to a larger understanding of where these guys came from?

CM: Well, I don't want to, again, infringe on any police investigation. But I will say that there are gangs throughout Europe that specialize in these types of smash and grab thefts -- everything from plotting them to selling the jewelry on moving it out of the country. And I know the police are investigating this angle. What I hope that the German police are doing is they're utilizing, they're asking for international assistance from the Italian carabinieri and other police forces that have infiltrated some of these gangs. And hopefully they're sharing intelligence.

CO: What hope is there that these pieces will be recovered intact?

CM: Well, I think hourly the chances are diminishing rapidly. I would like to see the police treat this as a hostage situation and immediately announce some sort of a reward for information, leading to the arrest and recovery of these objects intact. I'd like them to get a message to the criminals that their sentencing -- they will ultimately get caught, but their sentencing will be drastically increased if they destroy these pieces. And that their best chance now is to come forward and give up what they have without further destruction.

CO: Before they are melted down.

CM: That's right.

CO: Okay, Chris, thanks so much.

CM: Yes, my pleasure. Thank you.

DF: That was Christopher Marinello, the founder of Art Recovery International in London.

[Music]

Talkback: Pedestrians and drivers

DF: Is it a case of victim blaming or a common sense approach to reducing the number of victims? This year, more than 11-hundred pedestrians have been struck by cars in Toronto. More than 30 died as a result -- many of them senior citizens. And many of those fatalities occurred in Scarborough -- in the city's east end. Last night, Carol spoke with Cynthia Lai -- the city councillor from Scarborough North. Over the weekend, she handed out reflective armbands to seniors in the campaign to address the problem. Talkback took that conversation as a call to arms.

SOUNDCLIP

CALLER 1: My name is Loretta Traynor. I live in Scarborough. And this is in reference to the reflective armbands. They probably will be helpful (to) the people -- especially people who dress in dark clothing and especially when it's raining and in the evening. But also I think a lot of people are hit in the daytime. In fact, my grandson, when he was 7 -- just this past summer -- was almost hit. We were crossing. He started to walk a little bit ahead of me and the driver making a turn in front of us. She had the green light too but she was crossing in front of us. I guess to get ahead of us, she almost hit my grandson. And if I hadn't screamed, and I mean screamed at him, he wouldn't probably be here today. She missed him by an inch or so. And this is in the daytime -- in the middle of the afternoon and in the summer. So people need to pay more attention to pedestrians.

CALLER 2: Hi, my name is Judy Clark. I'm calling from Toronto. I'm both a pedestrian and a driver. And when I'm a pedestrian -- indeed, drivers drive too fast and go through red lights and do a lot that's very dangerous. But as a driver, at night on a dark street with black coat, as everyone seems to wear these days, it's very hard to see someone. I almost hit someone that was invisible yesterday. And I believe that reflective armbands are a good idea, as would be changing the fashion of getting some brighter coloured clothing on some of these people's back. Thank you.

DF: Many of you echoed similar sentiments via email. Ken Sudhues of Victoria, BC, emailed: "I'm a senior driver (seldom) and pedestrian (often) and what makes me fume is pedestrians who dressed from head to toe in black or other dark colors and then wear earbuds and/or hoods. Victim blaming be damned -- pedestrians have to share responsibility for their own safety, especially at night. Be aware, look around, and think about what you're doing."

CO: And Laurie Fyffe of Ottawa wrote: "I am a senior and a few weeks ago I was hit by a car while crossing at an intersection. A friend sent me a couple of bracelets that flash red like a bicycle light. And now I wear them when I go out at night. I don't believe my friend was blaming me for getting hit. They're fun and no one can say they don't see me coming."

DF: But on Twitter, some felt the armband effort was at cross purposes with a real solution. @universl tweeted: "This isn't a bad idea...but in isolation it is ineffective and does smack of victim blaming. The councillor should learn how to create strategy that works rather than just finding quick hit tactics that don't help.

CO: Thank you for all your responses. If you'd like to comment on anything you hear on this show, call our talkback line at 416-205-5687. Email us aih@cbc.ca. Or tweet us @cbcasithappens.

[Music]

Reporter vs pig

DF: Lazos Mantikos is a journalist for Greek TV who had a serious job to do this morning. He had to report on extensive flooding in the Attica region of that country, near Athens. But when the hosts of "Good Morning Greece" introduced him and looked to the big screen in the studio to say hello -- someone else or something else was trying to hog the limelight.

SOUNDCLIP

[People talking in Greek]

DF: "George, can you hear me?" the reporter says. "We have an issue here. There's a pig that's been chasing us all morning." The reporter runs back and forth, in and out of the shot to try to evade the persistent pig. But to no avail. If he was hungry and had run out of slop, the journalists ankles didn't seem to provide the requisite nutrition.

SOUNDCLIP

[Laughter]

DF: It's pig versus reporter. And as the hosts in the studio dissolve in laughter, eventually the crew decides the pig is winning and cuts the live feed entirely.

[Music]

CO: We are at the end of this edition of As It Happens. Our show can be heard Monday to Friday on CBC Radio One. And if you want to listen to our program live or on demand anytime, make sure you download the CBC Listen app. I'm Carol Off. Thanks for listening.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

November 26, 2019 Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This