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 28, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Daemon Fairless

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello. I'm Carol Off.

DAEMON FAIRLESS: Good evening. I'm Daemon Fairless. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

DF: Tonight...

CO: Scheer force of will. What started as murmurs of mutiny got a lot louder this week, but today Conservative leader Andrew Scheer made it clear he has no plans to leave the helm.

DF: Out of thick air. A massive explosion at a chemical plant in Texas forced the evacuation of tens of thousands of people and prompted warnings that residents shouldn't touch the floating "black stuff."

CO: They were gaining ground -- now they're leaving it. The World Health Organization pulled staff out of Democratic Republic of Congo after four health workers are murdered, and the violence threatens the progress that's been made fighting Ebola.

DF: Home truths. For decades, residents of the troubled Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children have lived with the after effects of the trauma they experienced -- the former resident says a public inquiry has proven therapeutic.

CO: Point counting points. The British Conservative Party insists it will hire 50,000 more nurses -- but a closer look at their charts suggests a much less rosy prognosis.

DF: And re-names to be seen. A Quebec town is asking its citizens to help with a major rebranding because, among other things, being called "Asbestos" tends not to be great for tourism. As It Happens. The Thursday Edition. Radio that figures more will visit there if they revisit that.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: Deadly attacks on Ebola workers in Congo 'a huge setback,' says aid worker

Scheer: supporter

Guest: Mark Strahl

DF: Andrew Scheer faced the cameras today with a big smile on his face. But that may not have been the easiest expression given recent expressions of discontent within his party's ranks. This week Quebec Tories and social Conservatives haven't been shy about telling media that Mr. Scheer should step down. And now a group of prominent Conservatives has even set up a non-profit dedicated to ousting the leader. Mr. Scheer tried to counter all the negativity today by unveiling his new team of frontbench Tories. Here's what he told reporters.

SOUNDCLIP

ANDREW SCHEER: There is no one more disappointed in the fact that we did not attain our goal in the last election than me. And there is no one more eager to get it right the next time. And we are going through a process right now of ensuring that we address those aspects of the campaign. When you look back at the conservative movement in Canada -- this is unfortunately part of what happens when we don't form government. That is fine. And members will have their say in April. But I am focused on the job at hand. I am focused on showing Canadians that it is a Conservative government that will keep this country united and strong. And that it is the Trudeau Liberals that have brought this country to that point. And I believe that our members will stay focused on that as well. Keep our team united and strong so that we can improve upon the gains that we had in this last election as we move forward.

DF: Flanking Mr. Scheer during that press conference was his brand new deputy leader, Leona Alleslev --who was a Liberal MP until she crossed the floor last year. Mark Strahl is Mr. Scheer's new Chief Opposition Whip. He joined us on the line from Ottawa.

CO: Mr. Strahl we just heard your leader say he wants to get it right the next time. Why should there be a next time for Andrew Scheer?

MARK STRAHL: Well, I think that it is very, very common that the leaders don't always succeed their first time out. I think that it is a knee jerk reaction -- I think of conservative movements to look for someone, to blame, when things don't go the way that we wanted it to. And I look back to when Stephen Harper had these same sorts of questions raised about him. "Why didn't he win the 2004 election against Paul Martin, who was on the ropes for the sponsorship scandal?" And 18 months later, we said that he should continue to be the leader and he was the prime minister. So these things move quickly. I think we're restless because we don't play to come in second.

CO: We saw him today. He fired a couple people last week. There weren't a lot of people. There weren't a lot of people around him. He has his new deputy, Leona Alleslev. You weren't there. Why weren't there more people like yourself surrounding him today if that is the support you want to give him?

MS: Thanks to Justin Trudeau, he's taken six weeks off since the campaign ended, MPs are not in Ottawa right now. So you can come back on Wednesday when we're back in Ottawa -- when all members of parliament will be there. We could have spent the tens of thousands of dollars to fly people across the country to stand behind them for five minutes. I think it's more important that we are working in our constituencies at this time.

CO: The only person who was there with Mr. Scheer was Leona Alleslev -- his new deputy. And up until September of last year she was a Liberal MP. So what message does that send?

MS: I think it sends a great message. She crossed the floor from Justin Trudeau's Liberals because she felt that he wasn't up to the job of being prime minister -- that he wasn't worthy of that position. She crossed because she believed in Andrew Scheer's principled leadership. She won as a conservative in the GTA under Mr. Scheer's leadership. And now she wants to help him become the prime minister.

CO: Don't you think -- I mean, okay, attract Liberals to the Conservatives -- don't you have a problem right now attracting conservatives to the Conservatives? You've got a bunch of people, groups, in your big tent Conservative Party who are not supporting Mr. Scheer. Your social Conservatives are saying he didn't do enough for their agenda. You've got people like Peter Mackay. Red Tory or progressive Tories, saying you this guy didn't do it, he could have, it was an open net, he could have scored. He didn't. Where does this support you say is there for him?

MS: I think, first of all, it's there in the caucus. But we are the only party besides the Bloc Quebecois who had increases -- who do have some successes to talk about. And I think we have to build on that, not simply turn on Mr. Scheer and say that all of the problems are solved with a new leader. Some of us that are have been involved in the party for a long time. We know some of the personalities that are that are seeking some media attention right now at attacking Mr. Scheer. They've never supported Mr. Scheer. They supported Maxime Bernier and others and are looking to settle old scores here. But we can't give Justin Trudeau a free pass for the next four or five months while we turn our guns inward. We're going to stay focused and united. The members will make the decision on leadership and our party like they always have.

CO: Okay, so you say even within the caucus there is support. Well, we know that Lisa Raitt did not win her seat. But she has been a very vocal supporter of Andrew Scheer even since this election. And she says that there is a growing consensus among Conservative Party members that Mr. Scheer was not strong enough as leader -- even though she doesn't always agree with that. So if Lisa Raitt can't even acknowledge that he is a good leader, how can others?

MS: Mr. Scheer will have to prove that he is the guy for the job. That is built right into our Constitution. This is not a surprise. I think that Mr. Scheer has the experience. He's kept the party united. That's what he ran on. That's what he did. It wasn't an easy task. I think he will lead us well. And I think come April, the members will recognize that.

CO: I mean many are saying one thing you needs to do is to apologize for what he said in 2005 about gay marriage. That lots of conservatives believe that this kind of thinking has no place in the party. So if he apologized for that, people might feel that he was moving in the right direction. Why doesn't he do that?

MS: I think that he has to obviously satisfy Canadians and conservatives on the social issues. There's no use pretending. You know, he has been very clear that he believes in the equality of all Canadians and that you shouldn't be discriminated upon based on your sexual orientation, race, religion. All of that he's made very clear. I think he regrets how that was communicated.

CO: Were you not yourself surprised or disappointed that he didn't -- once that came out about what he said in 2005 in the House about a being against gay marriage, calling it the tail in a dog -- didn't you want to hear him apologize for that?

MS: I think here he has to address that issue. And I think that, again, even that characterization of his speech is torqued up...

CO: Andrew Scheer insisted -- he said two members of the same sex cannot commit to the natural procreation of children. They cannot therefore be married. I don't know if that is torqued or not.

MS: Well, you referenced earlier you were talking about the analogy that he used. Look, I think it was clumsy at the time. I think that it is something that he will have to address and he has to satisfy our members that he can lead a big tent party like ours. I think he can. I think that his views are very much in line with the majority of Canadians. But he needs to articulate that in a way that our members are comfortable with.

CO: We spoke with someone who ran for the Conservatives and lost in Quebec. He said the thing that he confronted the most was at the door, people saying that your leader doesn't support a woman's right to choose. Is that another issue he has to confront?

MS: I think that he has always been known -- he's not apologize for being pro-life as millions of Canadians are. I think it was difficult in his second language during the one debate. Those candidates are all automatic delegates to our convention in April, and they will have an opportunity again to make their voice known as will members from across the country. So we want to learn from our mistakes and learn what we did well as well. I keep referring back to my home province of BC where we picked up seats in urban and suburban centres. The majority of our new seats were won by women. These are all positive things that we can build on, but we need to do better in many parts of the country. And that's what we're committed to doing.

CO: We will leave it there, Mr. Strahl. Thank you.

MS: Thank you.

DF: Mark Strahl is the Conservative Party's new Chief Opposition Whip. We reached him in Ottawa.

[Music]

Ebola workers killed

Guest: Grant Leaity

DF: They were making progress. On multiple days this past month, there were zero new cases of Ebola diagnosed in Congo. And overall rates of infection were declining steadily. Then early this morning, rebel fighters attacked Ebola workers at multiple sites in the country -- killing four and injuring at least five others. It's not the first time health workers have been attacked in Congo. But the growing threat has the World Health Organization evacuating many of its workers from the Beni region, where one of today's attacks occurred. Grant Leaity is the coordinator of UNICEF's Ebola response in the region. We reached him today in Beni.

CO: Mr. Leaity, first of all, I'm sorry for the death of your colleagues.

GRANT LEAITY: Thank you. Thank you for that. That's...that's a tragic thing to happen.

CO: We know there have been a number of incidents just in the last 24 hours. So can you walk us through what's happened?

GL: Yeah sure. So about just sometime after midnight, the first attack was what we believe at this point is that these attacks were coordinated by one of the armed groups in this area known as the Mai-Mai. And they came directly to the WHO compound in Biakato. Overwhelmed the guards. Penetrated and entered into the compound. And then there were fatalities by gunshot wounds. What then ensued -- there was a there was an attack just a little bit after that in another town, which is maybe about 55 kilometres south. A place now known as Mangina. And a group of Mai-Mai attacked some Congolese national police guarding a warehouse. There was an exchange that police actually pushed them back and killed one of the assailants. And in both locations, things went quiet for the next couple of hours. And when there was an attempt to move the wounded in Biakato -- from the base to the airport -- another attack was mounted. This movement was accompanied by some MONUSCO peacekeepers. And they came under heavy fire from the Mai-Mai. And they were finally repelled by the Congolese armed forces coming into intervene and support the MONUSCO. And then just very shortly after that, there was a fourth attack. This time at the WHO base in Mangina -- again, in the same town to the south. So all of this put together makes us think that this was a planned set of attacks.

CO: Why are the Mai-Mai militias -- why are they targeting health workers? People who are trying to deal with the Ebola crisis. What's their objective?

GL: Well at this stage it can only be hypothesis on that. But first of all, Ebola is something that causes a lot of fear. And there are voices which position it as a fabrication. And from people in very isolated rural communities, they see people coming out of nowhere, dressed in spacesuits -- they see their people going into these centres, many of them never come back. So there's a lot of challenge around having people actually understand what's going on. There are some people who are vaccinated, but they're vaccinated too late and then pass away. And one can understand how some people see that as being the vaccination is the cause of Ebola.

CO: So people are afraid of the health workers?

GL: Well, people are afraid of Ebola. And there's a feeling that by these health workers coming in, they will actually spread the contamination. There is another theory which is around the fact that over the course of the last five months, the overall Ebola caseload has come down considerably. Now there's a lot of money that comes into the Ebola response. So there are some theories that there may be elements which are -- you know there is a conflict of interest.

CO: But what does this do? Because you were getting the Ebola crisis under control. And there's been more than 2000 people in North and South Kivu and other province that have died from the virus. But you were getting a grip on it. So what does this do for the program of trying to prevent and help people with Ebola?

GL: Well it's a huge setback. I mean what's going to happen and this is not the first time it's happened is that we're going to have to, first of all, go into a you know -- go down to essential staff configuration. And apart from having the teams in these places, the question is to what extent will they be able to go out and do their full set of needed activities. And those involve going out and doing community engagement. Then we come in with surveillance. Then you have the vaccination of all of the contacts. They establish contacts. And the contacts of contacts. So as we have to scale back our actual operational capacity on the ground, that then is a situation where the epidemic is going to spread again a lot faster.

CO: It's a very very complex problem we're dealing with here. So I mean it must be getting very difficult to recruit doctors and health workers who will help you with this, who will go in and deal with the Ebola crisis.

GL: Indeed. This is the first hemorrhagic fever response in a conflict setting. We have not done this before anyway.

CO: You mean this is the first time you've had to deal with the Ebola crisis in a conflict -- in a warzone?

GL: Exactly. And one of the keys to success of containment is to get in very fast. So if there's a delay, if we don't have access, and if when we get in we don't have the confidence of the population -- it's very difficult to go about rapidly establishing and then following the established contact. So, indeed, it's complex.

CO: All right. We'll have to leave it there. And I wish you success with your work. It sounds extremely difficult. Mr. Leaity thank you for speaking with us.

GL: Thank you so much.

DF: Grant Leaity coordinates UNICEF's Ebola response in Congo, where four health workers have just been killed. We reached him today in Beni. And you can find more on that story on our website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Greg Rickford

DF: It might just have set the record for "shortest scrum." Ontario's Energy Minister Greg Rickford's press conference with media today lasted a mere 10 seconds before he ran away from reporters. Minister Rickford wanted to make his views on climate change clear -- one day after raising eyebrows in the legislature. During Question Period today, he cited a climate change denial blog to defend why his government scrapped hundreds of green energy projects. Here's what he said.

SOUNDCLIP

GREG RICKFORD: I had to go where I'd gone after all my years in university, Mr. Speaker, to the literature. I looked through periodicals. And here I come across the climate change dispatch. I had a quote yesterday, "Power grid operators had been struggling to keep the grid stable due to erratc feed-in and the subsidized feed-in of wind energy caused by German electricity prices to become amongst the most expensive worldwide." Mr. Speaker. That's why we let, Mr. Speaker, and got rid of those contracts.

VOICE: Thank you. Thank you very much.

DF: Today, reporters had lots of questions from Mr. Rickford -- but they only managed to squeeze in one. Here is City TV reporter Cynthia Mulligan.

SOUNDCLIP

CYNTHIA MULLIAN: Was it appropriate to be quoting that in the legislature as a legitimate source?

GREG RICKFORD: I believe in climate change and I believe it as a consequence of human activity. Thank you for this.

VOICE: So why wouldn't you just say "I am sorry I made a mistake?" Why are you leaving?

DF: Ontario Energy Minister Greg Rickford holding a scrum today that lasted all of 10 seconds.

[Music]

Asbestos town name change

Guest: Yan St-Hilaire

DF: The mayor of the Quebec town of Asbestos thinks the name of his town is, well...not the best. It was once a tribute to the asbestos mines nearby, which were the main economic engine of the region for decades. Now we know that breathing asbestos causes cancer and it's banned in many places around the world. So the town council thinks it's time to lay the name to rest. Yan St-Hilaire agrees. He's the co-owner of the Moulins 7 microbrewery in town. We reached him at his home in Asbestos.

CO: Yan why is it now time to get rid of the name of your town Asbestos?

YAN ST-HILAIRE: Yeah. In the past we got a great year in the mine. Asbestos found that the fiber was called the white gold and everything was going really well. But in the past years, the perception of asbestos has changed, and the mine has closed, and all be economic stuff in Asbestos doesn't depend on this industry anymore. And the perception of people of asbestos has gone bad.

CO: [Chuckles] Yes I would say that.

YAN ST-HILAIRE: In the mind of the people asbestos means cancer. It's like whether you agree or not it is that. We have to face the truth. We are really really proud of what we've been through. It was born because of the mine of asbestos -- there was no town here before. But now I think it's time to go in a positive way. Change the mind shift for people and the economy here. It's very important. It has a big impact -- the name of our town.

CO: I want to ask you about that. What is the impact that this name has? I mean as you say it's associated with cancer -- it kills tens of thousands of people every year. Much of the world has banned asbestos. So what effect does that have on your town's ability to attract business?

YAN ST-HILAIRE: I'm not in the attraction business. But what I heard the mayor (say) this morning on the local radio -- spoke about some examples. There was some company that was right on to build here, to have his company in Asbestos. And they changed their mind because of the name. They just realized that the impact of the name can (hurt) their business so they change their mind. There is a lab, a company here, and they had to buy equipment and the company didn't want to sell the equipment to them because it was in Asbestos, and they didn't want to be associated to that. Stuff like that. The economic development director of the town goes to Ohio for like recruitment -- and people didn't want to get his business card because it was named that he was from Asbestos.

CO: Oh dear that is pretty bad.

YAN ST-HILAIRE: Yeah.

CO: But now just for a point that it's important that in Quebec -- in French -- "asbestos" is not the name of this mineral. It's called "amiante" in French. So why does it matter in Quebec? Why not just keep your name and it's not "Amiante-vile" -- so why not be Asbestos?

YAN ST-HILAIRE: I think people with all what they heard they know that asbestos mean "amiante" --not everybody is for sure in our province, it is smaller...the impact. But it is there too and it is growing -- the fear of the asbestos is growing with the years. Why wait when everybody has a negative perception of this term -- it's time now we are in that mood of positive change. So I think it's just a good step. But I saw in social media that people ask -- they ask to make suggestions for Asbestos (re)naming. Some have just pointed "Cancerville" -- "Cancertown." So they know the perception of the asbestos is not good.

CO: Now your own brewery there -- you've used a name...it is called Moulin 7. That's a reference to the mine, isn't it?

YAN ST-HILAIRE: Yeah, it's a reference of the mine. All the building that they were working since the opening of the mine in 1880-something. And there was some Moulin -- so Moulin 1, Moulin 2 -- Moulin 3, 4, 5, 6. And they closed at Moulin 6. So that's why we have called our business Moulin 7 because like I said we are really proud of our story. We have to remember that the town exists just because of the mining. We cannot deny that. We are proud. We are not shy. And we are really proud to continue to craft beer -- to get inspired from our town. That's the story. It will not change. It will continue even if we change the name. We need to remember the past, but we need to look forward to a better future.

CO: So there has been some teasing, some mocking, with what the name should be. You mentioned that someone mentioned "Cancerville" and other ones like that. There's also "No-bestos" and "Ice-bestos." And someone said you should call it "Jeff" -- after the Jeffrey mine, I guess. Do you have any ideas?

YAN ST-HILAIRE: I have some personal idea. In our region it is called [inaudible] so that can be a great idea. But there's a lot of great ideas. And that's the positive thing in this change. It will be made together. It will be a population decision to choose a new name. So we will make history. That's really cool to make a town history. So I'm really positive and I'm really excited about that. And whatever will be the name it will be our decision. So it will be a good name for sure.

CO: Okay. We look forward to knowing what Asbestos will be in the future. And Yan it is good to talk to you. Thanks.

YAN ST-HILAIRE: Thanks a lot. Have a nice day.

DF: Yan St-Hilaire is the co-owner of the Moulin 7 microbrewery in Asbestos, Quebec. Which is where we reached him. The town council says it expects to announce a decision on a new name for the town sometime in 2020.

[Music]

Part 2: Texas chemical fire

Texas chemical fire

Guest: Mike Tobias

DF: Tens of thousands of Texans won't be home for Thanksgiving. They've been evacuated from a region near Houston after a massive explosion at a chemical plant yesterday. The blast rattled houses in the town of Port Neches -- shattering windows and blowing doors right off their hinges. No one was killed, but a fire is still burning today. And a smoke cloud covered the area surrounding the TPC group plant. Mike Tobias is a teacher at the local high school who fled his house yesterday with his wife and two kids. We reached him at his in-laws' in nearby Port Arthur.

CO: Mike, first of all, how are you and your family doing?

MIKE TOBIAS: So far, we're okay. We are hanging in there. And today is Thanksgiving, so we are about to do all of that.

CO: And so on the eve of Thanksgiving, you had to get out. Can you describe the initial explosion that happened yesterday?

MT: The first blast came about 1:00 in the morning and it came in about two waves -- if that makes sense. Like there was an initial blast and a flash of light, which you know it sounded similar. It was like a large clap of thunder. And then a flash of lightning. Something happened at the same time. So you knew it was close. The initial flash and blast, I mean we sat up because that was pretty loud. And then a few seconds later is when the shockwave came in and hit the house. And that just shook everything. It just feels like when you're driving down the road and you hit a large pothole and the whole car just sort of has that initial jolt. But it felt like that around the whole house. Everything just shook. And what made it louder was the sheet rock in our dining room fell -- like the entire dining room ceiling just collapsed onto my kitchen table in the dining room. So, you know, that all happened at the same time. So that made it really loud.

CO: And that was just the reverberation from it. How close are you to this plant?

MT: My house is about four blocks away I'd say. It takes me less than 10 minutes to get to the front of the facility. And I have to drive by it every morning to take my daughter to school.

CO: So after that happened -- you have two kids -- what were you thinking? What was in your mind at that point about what you needed to do?

MT: After the blast I knew what had happened. I think that was my first words out of my mouth was that was the plant. We live within driving distance of about three or four. And there's several more in the area. That's just the industry down here. So, you know, we got to the living room and saw that the front door had blown open. We could see like a large orange glow coming into the living room, which at that point then we just went to look outside to see where. And then we saw which way it was. And of the refineries and plants -- it was the one closest to us which that was alarming in itself. And so at that point, it was just 'we've got to get the kids' -- we got to get whatever, and we needed to leave. Getting the kids out of the house...we had to carry them out through the living room so they didn't step on anything. I didn't even know that the ceiling had collapsed in the kitchen. My daughter had pointed it out to me that the ceiling which was dropped out.

CO: How old are you kids?

MT: 10 and 6.

CO: And so you had to get out -- did you take anything with you besides yourselves and your children?

MT: No. As much as we could find at the top of our heads. The kids, I mean, they're old enough to where we say "get your bag and get stuff in there" -- they knew to get a bag and put stuff in. And they weren't that helpless. But my older daughter, she got whatever she could. My younger daughter got more toys. And my wife and I we grabbed what we could. You think I need to grab what I can -- and you try your best to just get whatever you think you might need. You know, we just knew we had to leave. So my in-laws -- her parents -- live maybe about a mile or more down the road. So that was our first stopping point. It was just to get over there.

CO: But now this isn't an ordinary fire. It is a chemical plant. What do they produce at that plant?

MT: The facility is called TPC now. But there used butane. So, I mean, that's the sort of chemicals that they work with over there. It's stuff that goes into polymers that make like tires and rubber. I mean, the road that runs past this plant is nicknamed "Rubber Plant Road" because that's just the stuff that they produced over there.

CO: Butane comes from gas. They make that out of gas. So that's highly explosive.

MT: Oh, God. I mean, again, the facilities that are around here...that's the industry down here. It's the petrochemical industry. And we are a pretty big part of that in the country as far as where we're based and what we do. There's not a person in a house probably in this area that is not connected some way to a refinery. Either they work there themselves or their dad work there, the brother worked there, the grandfather worked there. That is the industry. It's just all around us.

CO: So it's not just smoke and fire, there's must be chemicals in the air because of that. What are you hearing about what you need to do to protect yourselves?

MT: Well what is being said right now -- there is a four-mile radius around the facility, which they're encouraging people -- not encouraging -- but it's a mandatory evacuation right now still. They are saying -- the company and the county -- they've hired a company to monitor the air control in the area obviously because that's something that they need to account for. And there are -- if I'm not mistaken -- they said they set up 20 different points around the area where the air is being monitored. And so far, nothing is coming back. That's a red flag warning for anything. The smoke that's being seen all over is pretty much smoke from the fire. Although, you know, they have said multiple times at this point, since they're still in the process of fighting the fire, that they can't be too sure what's in the smoke or what's up there, so that's been said a few times. Obviously, they're trying to just be sure that everyone's cautious. And even the newscasters down here -- who were doing live reporting last night -- they had masks over their mouths and nose.

CO: There are serious health concerns associated with breathing in the fumes of a fire like that. Are there not?

MT: The initial short term reactions that they're talking about is obviously, you know, irritation to the eyes and sneezing and stuff like that. But, you know the reason for the four mile-radius, what we're hearing is they are more concerned about the long term effects of just being exposed to whatever is going on.

CO: Now, you're at your in-laws' -- but that isn't so far away from the fire. It is within that four-mile radius, right?

MT: We're probably a good just more than a mile away from the facility right now.

CO: Do you think you should be further away?

MT: We were last night, you know, and if we hear of anything else now -- we have the van loaded...ready to go, just in case there's another explosion. Now yesterday we heard a second explosion from here, which did nothing to the house. It did nothing to our structure where we're sitting. You know, we just heard a sound like a clap of thunder off in the distance. But from where I'm sitting in the same structure right now, it was fine.

CO: And do you have any idea at this point what state your house is in?

MT: I just went back to the house and everything was just the way we left it yesterday. Nothing more has fallen. It's all just still there.

CO: So how are you celebrating Thanksgiving?

MT: Well...we've got what we can. I think the meal was already in the works. I mean, we didn't even take our razor or our deodorant. However, we did manage to bring the jello and the cranberry sauce and everything else for the meal we were going to make for the meal.

CO: Well, at least you have your safety to be thankful for today. And so I'm glad that's the case. And I really appreciate speaking with you, Mike. Thank you.

MT: No problem. Thank you very much.

CO: Happy Thanksgiving.

MT: Thank you very much.

DF: Mike Tobias teaches journalism at Port Neches-Groves High School. We reached him at his in-laws' house in Port Arthur, Texas -- not far from Houston.

[Music]

50,000 Nurses

SOUNDCLIP

BORIS JOHNSON: Today in this manifesto, we pledge 50,000 more nurses and their bursaries. And 50-million more GP surgery appointments. And today we make this guarantee to the British people.

DF: That's Britain's Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, with a guarantee of 50,000 more nurses for the country's struggling national health service. He made the promise last week as part of the Tory election manifesto. The numbers seem pretty clear and well defined until they became quite a bit less clearer. Downright opaque, in fact. Because it seems upon further inspection that those numbers include 19,000 nurses who already work for the NHS. This morning, Mr. Johnson's health secretary, Matt Hancock, was on the ITV show Good Morning Britain. For the record, here are hosts Susanna Reid and Ben Shephard trying to understand the extremely fuzzy math.

SOUNDCLIP

SUSANNA REID: You have to forgive us for being slightly confused. Because we spoke to Nicky Morgan this week on the program who admitted that 50,000 more nurses would include 19,000 who already exist in the NHS, which by anyone's calculation means there are only going to be 31,000 more nurses.

MATT HANCOCK: No. 31000 new nurses. 50,000 more nurses in total. Because some nurses do leave the NHS. And I want to reduce the amount of nurses who leave the NHS and go and work elsewhere. I want the NHS to be an even better place to work. And by reducing the number who leave, you increase the number who are there. I mean, by definition. So 50,000 more nurses. I understand that Piers got a bit muddled and it's a shame...

BEN SHEPHARD: It's not just Piers. That's not fair. It's not just Piers. But Matt if those nurses are already working in the NHS, they're already there, and you're just choosing to make sure that they stay there -- how can you described them as more nurses? They're already there.

SUSANNA REID: You're double counting them.

MATT HANCOCK: Because the commitment is to increase the total number of nurses who are currently working the NHS from two hundred and eighty thousand to three hundred and thirty thousand. That's a 50,000 increase. And of course, if you run any organisation, to increase the number of people you've got, you want to hold onto more of those you've got already and you want to get new.

SUSANNA REID: Matt Hancock why don't you just go the whole hog and say, we currently have two hundred and eighty thousand nurses. We're going to have two hundred and eighty thousand more because we're going to persuade every single one of them to stay.

MATT HANCOCK: Well, at the moment, about 27,000 leave each year. And we want to reduce that figure because working in the NHS is an amazing thing to do.

SUSANNA REID: But can you not see...with all due respect to you in your position, can you not see how the numbers don't make sense to people?

DF: For the record, that was ITV's Susanna Reid and her colleague Ben Shephard trying desperately to get some numerical clarity from UK Health Secretary Matt Hancock.

[Music]

Nova Scotia home report

Guest: Tony Smith

DF: It was almost a century ago that the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children opened its doors. But its legacy of racism, abuse, and neglect continues to this day. Now a public inquiry into that dark past offers some insight on how to move forward. It details residents experiences of unsanitary conditions, going to bed cold and hungry, and accusations of physical, emotional, and sexual abuse. But it also offers guidance and support for the journey ahead. And as a restorative inquiry, it involved former residents in the process. Among them is Tony Smith, who was sent to the home at age 5. Mr. Smith revisited that history as the co-chair of the council of parties behind the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children Restorative Inquiry. We reached him in Halifax.

CO: Tony, what did it mean for you to see this report finally come out?

TONY SMITH: Mixed feelings and emotions, to be quite honest with you. But overall, very excited, very happy, that it's finally out and that society is going to be able to learn a lot from what we've learned.

CO: Do you feel that the voices of those who were victims of this group home, do you think that they were heard? Do you think that they've had their say?

TS: Yes. Last night was a special night for us because we got together with a lot of the former residents -- especially when we first got together in 2012 -- what we would want the inquiry to be. We were with the council of party members last night and we shared some of the stuff that was in the report. And they were able to share with us exactly what this means to them. And the causes that it had on their life, finally dealing with the shame that they always carried around, that it was not theirs.

CO: And what did they tell you? What kinds of responses did you get from that group?

TS: A lot of stuff about being thankful -- that you came out and spoke and how it encouraged other people to come out to speak. Showing the courage and how resourceful that they were of surviving and trying to move forward. A lot of jubilation. I mean, it's just amazing to see how they transform from when I first met with them. In 2012 when we met as a group, there was a lot of anxiety, stress, pain, crying, shaken, like physically you can just see that. And through that process, we realized that we're no longer victims, that we are survivors, and that they wanted to make sure that we continue with the fight, that their stories will be used in a way to make sure they're not forgotten, but also that whatever we do move in the future, no child should ever go through what we went through. And if we do it, let's do it in a way that it does no further harm.

CO: I want to ask you, but the way you did it, because it was not a traditional inquiry where there is a bunch of things and a checklist of recommendations. It was called a restorative inquiry. How was that different?

TS: Well, your traditional public inquiry is usually your retired judge who looks at all the documentations, and then makes all the recommendations as to what they think is best for you. And the government or whatever agency may implement some of those things, but normally sits on the bookshelf. This particular inquiry, we had a council of parties instead of one person. So we had people that reflected that needed to be there as far as government, as far as people from the black community, former residents. And we then would have a team that will go out to the various stakeholders that was associated to the institution like the African United Baptist Association, board members, the police, the RCMP. Looking at the various government departments: health, education, community services, etc. And then when we started to go out and meet with these particular organizations individually, they`re saying, what is it that we can do together collectively to try to understand what happened in the past from our perspective and what policies are in place today that may need to be changed that we can look at in making a better future?

CO: One of the interesting things, though, is that usually in this kind of inquiry is an establishment of responsibility of who was to blame for this. But this was not intended -- you were not going to find or lay blame. Don't you think somebody has to be held accountable for what happened to the children in that home?

TS: Well, that's what they're doing. They're taking accountability by looking at doing things differently. So a shift that we're doing here is that everything used to be the different departments working in silos, which has caused harm and wasn't focused on the child care. The shift now is looking at it more as a humanistic approach where you're looking at the child and what resources did that child have. What kind of things that we can do -- for example, family life decision making is an option of looking when kids are coming into care before you actually take them away from their homes, you look at the family, you look at the community, you see what they can do to look after their child. Whether it is between mom and dad or, you know, the family structures -- what is it that they have to do to change in order to make that home safe for the child to come back, let them do what they need to do, and if they fit the criteria then the family comes back together without going to the justice system or without that child being taken into care and being traumatized by going and staying with strangers.

CO: You've said in the past that you felt that you had to speak out because of something that happened to one of your friends. And can you tell us about that and why that was necessary for you?

TS: Well, with the abuse that we suffered, their: physical, mental, and sexual. I have a friend of mine, Anthony Langford, who had a heart condition. And unfortunately, he took a beating. And a few days later, he had died. And we told the staff what had happened. And they told us that if we ever spoke that lie, then we would be beaten. So as a kid, I realized they can do whatever they want to do. They can kill you. HIs life meant nothing. Therefore, my life meant nothing. But that bothered me. And I vowed that I was going to tell his story. So through different work that I did, trying to educate people with kids in care -- a reporter, told me that the Colored Home was looking to get heritage status to renovate the old home, and we thought it'd be nice to have a former resident's perspective. So I said, I don't mind telling you my story, but it may not be the story you want to hear. But before I did that, I asked permission from my family to give me their blessing because I didn't want to bring any shame to them. So I didn't care what people thought of me or what they had to say about me. It was very important that I tell his story. And as a result, it ended up being the 330 people that were part of the class action and that this went on for decades, which I didn't know.

CO: So you feel that your friend, Anthony Langford, he has been recognized, his voice has been heard, even though he's not there?

TS: That's right. His spirit is the one that had driven this, because no matter how hard or how difficult things were getting, I was telling people in council members, don't worry, this has a life of its own and it will come to an end in a very positive way.

CO: Tony, thank you so much for speaking with us.

TS: Thank you very much for having me.

DF: Tony Smith is the co-chair of the Council of Parties behind the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children Restorative Inquiry. He's also a former resident and the co-chair of the advocacy group "VOICES" (Victims of Institutional Child Exploitation Society). We reached Mr. Smith in Halifax.

[Music]

Legal Grounds

DF: The prosecutor paces in front of the witness stand where the defendant sprawls carelessl. "Mr. Flufferton," the prosecutor says, "Isn't it true that you and your peers are part of a brutal, murderous, syndicate that you kill with impunity and sometimes leave your victims on peoples welcome mat as a disgusting calling card?" The defendant stretches adorably and rolls over onto its back. The jury sighs appreciatively. "Objection," the prosecutor roars, "Your Honor. The defendant clearly has no respect for these proceedings. It's licking its own rear end." Well, obviously, there was no courtroom drama involving cats this week. And if they could have even wrestled one to a cat carrier to represent its species, it would have gone to sleep or...well, it would've gone to sleep. But two lawyers did say that they might have legal grounds for a case against the government of the Netherlands for not stopping cats from roaming around and killing animals, including birds. Because wild birds are protected by European Union law. Ergo: the Dutch government is not doing its duty to protect vulnerable creatures from cute mass murderers. Ergo: potential lawsuit. This has forced both the Dutch government and the European Commission to adamantly deny that they have any plans to ban cats from being let out. And forced the commission's environmental spokesperson to tell the press, quote, "We categorically deny that the commission will oblige cats to be held on a leash at all times." Well, that's bad news for the animals they kill by the millions. But good for cats since they had no plans to change any ways.

[Music]

Part 3: Trappist cheese

Trappist Cheese

Guest: Dustin Peltier

DF: Trappist monks in Manitoba first started making cheese in their traditional style back in 1918. A couple of years ago, two chefs from Winnipeg decided they'd like to get in on the act. Rachel Isaak and Dustin Peltier got a lesson in cheese making from a man named Brother Alberic, and set out to produce their own. But now they say they've been forced to quit because provincial regulations make it too expensive for their cheese to stand alone. We reached Dustin Peltier in Winnipeg.

CO: Dustin, how exactly are provincial regulations in Manitoba getting in the way of running your cheese business?

DUSTIN PELTIER: They're making it stricter than anywhere else in the country. We're not opposed to the regulations. We're not against being quality controlled and tested. We totally want that. Our whole goal is to make a safe product. Our regulatory or our regulators don't know anything about cheese. And they've stated that on numerous occasions. So rather than understanding the laws or the rules, they're making them as strict as they can so that they hold no liability whatsoever. And if they can make it as hard as they can on us, then maybe we can just disappear and then they don't have to do it.

CO: So do you think they're doing it deliberately, that you're just too much trouble as an artisanal cheese maker, that they've got bigger fish to fry so to speak, and that they would really rather you just went away?

DP: Yes. And it's not just us. It's a systematic problem that a lot of Manitoba processors and farmers have when dealing with Manitoba agriculture. We just had a meeting with 20 other processors and farmers and different organizations, and everybody seeing the same story where the rules are stricter than anybody else unless we've got a million dollars to invest. No one is going to be able to get ahead.

CO: But you know that. I mean you were making cheese with unpasteurized milk and for the health regulators in Canada a big warning sign goes off on that because there can be health problems with that. The inspectors are finding issues with that across the country. So can you see why they'd want to have pretty strict inspections on you?

DP: We hundred percent agree. It's a cost of the ones. And it is it is a product that we're using -- we're not selling raw milk. We are selling raw milk cheese. Just like we're not selling ground beef -- it would be the same as selling a pre-cooked burger. Like there is more people who get sick from bagged lettuce than they do for any raw milk or cheese. So we accept all of these tests. They're forcing us to test at certified labs, which cost 10 times more than say our dairy department at the university who can do the same tests and give us the same seal of approval. So where other parts of the country are allowed to test from their universities or from labs that aren't certified -- to get certified it costs a lot of money, so that goes back on to the people that are paying for the tests. We're just asking for an even playing field as far as the rest of the country is concerned.

CO: So are you saying it's just the cost of meeting the regulations that's not the regulations themselves?

DP: Yes, that's exactly it. We are finally testing every single batch of cheese at a university because those tests we can swallow those costs. If we are forced to test at a certified lab, we lose money on every single batch of cheese we make.

CO: How much money are you losing on these tests?

DP: So right now, it cost us 500 dollars to test a batch of cheese. We can only sell that batch of cheese for 300 dollars.

CO: And how much does it cost you to make the batch of cheese?

DP: So it costs us 120 dollars to make a batch of cheese. [Laughter]

CO: Okay. [Laughs] So I'm not good at math, but I'm adding this up.

DP: Right? So the math doesn't work. We could test at the university for like 25 to 50 dollars.

CO: Can you just tell us a bit about this cheese that you're making. You were trained. You learned how to do it from a Trappist monk. Right? They were doing it for a number of years. Decades. And so what is this cheese you make?

DP: So it's a raw milk cheese that we hand wash every day for 60 days -- 45 to 60 days -- depending on how it's aging. It's aged on wood planks. It's a recipe that's been made in Manitoba for over 100 years. It came over from Europe in the 1890s. It's been made by monks since the 1700s. It's kind of a semi-soft cheese. It's washed rind so it's got a lot of flavor and character. And in the raw version, you really taste a lot. And it's a really great kind of cheese.

CO: And are the Trappist monks still making it? You said you have no other manufacturers of this. They've stopped making it?

DP: They have stopped. Brother Alberic who was the last monk making it, stopped a year and a half ago. He's 85 years old. He's made enough cheese in his life. So where were the last ones.

CO: Can you make the cheese without using the unpasteurized milk? Can you use pasteurized milk and make the same product?

DP: It's not the same products. We've been making for about a month -- we've been making some small test batches of pasteurized milk in the same style, doing the same recipes, aging on boards. And it's not the same cheese. We just did a taste test-- it is similar but you can tell that it is a muted flavor. It doesn't have that same depth and that same linger of flavor and everything else.

CO: You know that other provinces allow for this kinds of cheese. In fact Quebec has a number of artisanal raw milk cheeses on the market. Do you think that may be regulations elsewhere will catch up -- Manitoba will catch up with that?

DP: We are hoping so. Part of us going forward or coming forward and giving everybody what was happening is that we could maybe grow a little bit more of a voice. We're hoping with a bigger voice -- we've got some communities and some organizations that are now kind of coming in behind us -- we've been trying to get a meeting for months, the next thing we have a meeting, they may take us a little bit more seriously.

CO: Well, Dustin, we'll leave it there and hope for the best. Thank you so much.

DP: Okay. Thank you.

DF: Dustin Peltier is a Winnipeg chef and the co-owner of the Loaf and Honey Creamery, which will now no longer be making traditional Trappist style cheese from unpasteurized milk. We reached him in Winnipeg. We contacted Manitoba Agriculture about this story. It sent a statement which said that, in fact, the province will pay for some portion of the testing, but it does insist it be done in an accredited third party lab. The statement goes on, quote, "It's important to note the cheese made from milk that has not been pasteurized to kill pathogens poses a greater risk to consumers and has been linked to numerous foodborne illness outbreaks. A consistent, validated production process must be followed."

[Music]

Encore: Gordana Knezevic

Guest: Gordana Knezevic

DF: For four years, the city of Sarajevo was under siege. And Gordana Knezevic was there the whole time reporting everything she saw. During the Bosnian war, Ms. Knezevic was the deputy editor of the daily newspaper "Oslobedjenje" and she fearlessly reported on the ethnic cleansing in the country -- even when people were shooting at her. She now lives in Canada. And last night at a gala for the group Canadian Journalists for Free Expression, Gordana Knezevic was awarded for her courageous reporting. During her speech she said, quote, "The breakdown of Yugoslavia was caused by extreme ethnic nationalism. It is the worst kind of hatred. It was not clear then, but it does now. The Bosnian war did not come from tribal wars of the distant past. It came from the future." In 2012, for the 20th anniversary of the beginning of the siege of Sarajevo, Carol returned to the city as part of our series "Sarajevo Remembered." From our archives, here she is, speaking with Gordana Knezevic in "Word on the Street.".

SOUNDCLIP

[Vehicle sound]

CO: We've come down to a grimy little bus station in downtown Sarajevo to speak with Gordana Knezevic. She was deputy editor of the "Oslobedjenje" newspaper during the war. And she had a huge responsibility to keep people informed. But Gordana was also the mother of young children, and this otherwise banal depot represents an immense tragedy for her. Her last visit here was a few weeks after the siege of Sarajevo began. This is where you brought your children in early days of the war. Can you tell us about the day you came down here with your kids?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: That is probably today -- which I remember the best from the entire war. And maybe for me it was the most difficult day. It was May 2nd, 1992. And that's the day when the war actually started in the full scale. But we didn't know that the day before a journalist visited me and said that she has two tickets for the bus which was on its road to Belgrade. And she said that she can take two of my kids with her. And I remember at the time my husband and I -- we made the kind of instant decision that the little one, Olga, who was six at the time, that she has to go out and her brother, Igor, who was 14 at the time, would go out to take care of her.

CO: At that point, did you think that it would last very long or what were your...

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: You know I thought at the time, it's just for the summer. It's short separation and this won't last. And somebody would stop this. Because I only packed summer clothes. And I remember when the winter started, I couldn't stop thinking "how I didn't put their coats" "how they made it in the bigger world" you know? And this is where we came. And I remember my daughter, who was 6, she thought it was fun to go on the trip to visit her brother, you know, without parents around. She was in a perfect mood and running around and smiling. And my husband and I we tried to keep a straight face, you know, to act like being brave. And we pretended that we knew what we were doing. But I was just thinking, what will happen next and will this smile go away? I didn't have an idea of what was waiting for them outside. It was only clear to me that she shouldn't stay here because the shelling already started, because the bad things already happened. People were already killed in this city and there was no way even to persuade her to stay at home. She wanted to go out. She wanted to play.

CO: And your husband was with you?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: Yes.

CO: You came down to this place. What was the scene here?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: There were three buses and people like myself putting their kids and members of family. And it was terrible silence. It was so silent. People were not talking. And on that day, by the time when we got home -- we walked home -- a full scale war developed in this city. And Igor, my son, who was listening to the newscast on the bus -- he thought that something was wrong with the newscast because he said the war reports were coming in and he left a peaceful city and he thought those were fake reports.

CO: As Gordana headed home, she didn't know her two children were on the last commercial bus to leave Sarajevo for the duration of the war. Her middle child, Boris, stayed with her and her husband, Ivo. Oslobedjenje became her principal focus. People desperately needed the daily newspaper to know where to get food and water, what the rest of the world was saying about Bosnia, how to survive. The paper hit the streets every day, even when it was just sheets of whatever paper they could find to print on. Gordana took me to what was once the Oslobedjenje building. Reduced to rubble in the war. It's now been rebuilt as a hotel complex, complete with a drive-through McDonald's. We went around the back of the building and we actually found the remains of her old newsroom.

CO: Gordana can you remember the day that the war came to your newsroom?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: I certainly can remember. The first bullet which came to my newsroom -- we were sitting and doing stories and it was 6:00 in the afternoon when I heard a strange noise. And the snipers were hitting the glass of our newsroom. And I just remember the terrible sound. It cannot be compared to whatever natural sound I'm aware of. It was something like a wild cat screaming. And the glasses were breaking one after the other. My first instinct was to move to the floor, to go below the level of the glass. And we are just now standing below this windows. They are still missing -- 20 years after the war started. There is no window on this side of the building. And it was a terrible moment. I remember we all rushed later on to the office of editor in chief. So it means that first instinct is you are looking for authority, like editor in chief could change situation.

CO: Can you actually see into where your desk would have been?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: Absolutely. It's right over there. It's just between those two posts, which you can see. And that's where I was sitting for ages. And that's where I received the first bullets. And I remember as well on that very day, obviously, they were shooting people, you know, not building. But some of the bullets came and they destroyed the paintings which we had on the wall. And I remember the TV crew came next day to take a photo of this horrible, you know, thinking -- I mean, at the time, hitting the building looked horrible because it happened before entire city would have the same destiny. And I remember we were pointing to TV crew, "Look, they shot the painting" you know thinking of it as disaster, not knowing that in a short period there would be 10,000 people dead in this city. You know shooting a painting was nothing.

CO: Tell me about the moment and how the newspaper decided it was -- despite this beginning, this horrible sound of the beginning of war -- that you were going to keep on putting a newspaper out.

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: I even cannot remember that as being something I made a rational decision. It's not that I was not considering, well, shall I stay or shall I leave? It's not the way how you make decisions when you are under such a pressure like war, like some horrible circumstances. Decisions are made for you inside you without your being aware that they were made. You know, like it's been decided inside you since ever. I even didn't consider the option to leave. And it's probably anger. You are angry that somebody is doing this to you. And you're angry that somebody is trying to shut your newspaper down. You're angry that somebody is shooting your newspaper and trying to ruin your printing press, trying to ruin your workplace. I mean, there was no reason for that. At the time staff of Oslobedjenje 60 percent were Serbs. So we had a large Cyrillic numbers at the top of our building. Oslobedjenje as printing as well in both Cyrillic and Latin letters, you know, so it was as much Serb as Croatian, as Muslim as Jewish. It was a newspaper of all people of Bosnia and Herzegovina. And probably the reason it was targeted was just because it represented all the people. Because what Karadzic and his people wanted they wanted division. They wanted Serbs go to Serb territories, Croats to Croats territory, and Muslims stay there and create your little small Muslim state. That was what Karadzic wanted.

SOUNDCLIP

[Man speaking in Bosnian language]

CO: That's the voice of Radovan Karadzic -- leader of the Bosnian Serb nationalists, and from a broadcast in October 1991. He is telling the Bosnian parliament, "I warn you, you'll drag Bosnia down to hell. You Muslims aren't ready for war. You could face extinction." Mr. Karadzic's goal was to create an ethnically pure Serbian state. And the world soon learned the phrase "ethnic cleansing." Throughout the war, As It Happens, spoke frequently with Radovan Karadzic. Here's Michael Enright interviewing him in January 1993.

SOUNDCLIP

MICHAEL ENRIGHT: Mr. Karadzic, generally, in your view, how is the ethnic cleansing going?

RADOVAN KARADZIC: Ethnic cleansing was not part of our policy anytime. Ethnic cleansing was on all sides. And it was a sort of ethnic shift in people because Serbs had escaped from Muslim surrounding and Christian surrounding. And the Muslims escaped from Serbian surrounding so they can return immediately after they make final settlement. There were not able to resettle these people.

CO: His denials were lost on the people of Sarajevo. They could see exactly what was happening, that Radovan Karadzic wanted to drive Muslims out of the city. And if he had to kill Serbs and Croats while he was at it, well, to him, that was just the price of war. For Gordana Knezevic, living in this multicultural city of Sarajevo -- ethnic cleansing was not just mad. It was impossible. She's an ethnic Serb. Her husband was a Croat. The family considered themselves Bosnians. Surely this Greater Serbia project was going nowhere. But when Radovan Karadzic's forces hit the Oslobedjenje building with tank fire, there was no doubt left. Gordana's newspaper was a target.

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: It happened in summer of 1992. The tabloid was constantly being hit by shells from nearby military barracks, which was just across this fence, which we can see on the other side. The entire building was burning. And the biggest miracle was that next day there was the newspaper. And I remember everybody in the city was kind of congratulating each journalist personally -- because they saw it on TV, the picture. They saw the Oslobedjenje building under fire. For them the newspaper came straight out of that fire, you know? And then I even was shocked that next night I came here and I asked the guys here, "how did you manage?" And they said that until 6:00 in the morning, the people who were journalists who were inside the building were helping firefighters to put down the fire. And that at 6 o'clock, they pressed the printing press, you know. And the paper published.

CO: And where was the press?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: Printing press was -- and it still is -- in the basement. And it was perfectly protected. The funny story about the printing press is that the reason why it was so well protected is because we couldn't build this building without Yugoslav army approving our all security plans. And at the time, the Yugoslav intelligence service would approve the plan, which is protecting us against possible attack from NATO and [inaudible] pact. And so we would be ready for being attacked by entire world. And then this perfect security measures kept us alive against the same army which teach us how to protect against full scale war.

CO: So did you have to try and write as though you were completely neutral? Did you have to de-ethnicize the stories in order to continue? Because you needed the support of the United Nations to get you news print, to go to press conferences. Were they scrutinising you for any bias that you might demonstrate?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: I believe that we were as objective, as neutral, as it was possible. But it was not our obsession. We didn't think much about that. We were trying to be fair to the facts and we were trying to be fair to the audience. And in the wartime, it's much more important to have the facts right than in a peacetime. It's more important because people make decision based on what you write. You know, they decide to stay or to leave. They decide to do this or that. So you feel a tremendous responsibility to get it right.

CO: At what point did you realize that this was your new reality?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: It's hard to say because almost through the entire war, there was hope. There was this great hope that once outside world learned about this, they will react. You know, somebody would do something -- intervene. You really hope if you're robbed in the street that the police officer would come and do something about it. You know, so in that sense, what was moving us, what kept us alive, what pushed us to publish every day was this faint hope -- well, as long as we managed to get the news out, the outside world would react. So it's almost when the war ended, that's when the hope died.

CO: The hopes of many Sarajevans took its first hit here on the Vrbanja bridge.

SOUNDCLIP

[War sounds]

CO: This is the sound of the chaos when a last desperate peace march across this bridge turned into a bloodbath. Two women -- Olga and Suada -- became Sarajevo's first victims of the war 20 years ago this week. Gordana shows me the plaque that commemorates those two women.

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: It says 'A drop of my blood flow. And after that entire country, Bosnia turned to a wasteland.'

CO: This bridge and the roads connecting it became a no man's land during the four years of the war. But today, it's a beautiful promenade. There are families taking a Sunday walk. No one here seems to remember it as Gordana does. How do you see the city now that you're back?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: It's a very much changed city. And I can see that first of all, nice thing to see is Sarajevo united. This part which was under Serb control, is now part of Sarajevo. Although I still have trouble to cross this bridge and to go the other side. Somehow I can do it only with a very heavy legs because this fear is still with me. I remember it well. And what I like in this city that this is actually forgotten. And people don't care about this. And if this fear stayed and if these memories were here, people couldn't live. They couldn't go on with their lives.

CO: Do you feel that in this city this week? Do you feel for this anniversary, that 20 years after, that people are living their lives and have forgotten?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: And most people have forgotten the war, have forgotten what happened. You know most people get on with their lives, you know, in trying to make the best out of the day. I see the war being forgotten in a good way. And for the good purpose.

CO: There are babies and children playing on the street here on their bikes who would have been born years after this. So this is a whole new generation of Bosnians.

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: Absolutely. Absolutely. And in a way, you know, like I mean some good things happened as well. You cannot keep these memories and run your life in a normal way. You just have to draw the line. And probably the only keepers of memories are people who left like myself.

CO: Gordana became a refugee after the war ended. Making her way to Canada. It had been nearly five years since she said goodbye to her son and daughter at that bus station -- a separation she thought would only last a few months. Igor wound up in England. His sister Olga in Croatia. Gordana has other child, Boris, was in Sarajevo with her for most of the siege. The whole family finally reunited in Toronto.

CO: When you finally did reunite at Pearson Airport, all of you as a family, can you describe your feelings at that time?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: It was almost unbelievable, you know? The boys were grown up, you know. When we separated, they were small, two teenage kids, you know. And now they were two grown up boys. And my daughter was a 10 year old -- and it was tremendous happiness, you know, to be able to touch them, to be able to see them. But then it was complicated because the boys expected me and my husband to be parents in charge and to be in full control of situation and to know what we were doing. You know, my husband and I were just the shadow of the people we used to be. We needed somebody to adopt us -- to take care of us. So it was hard in all directions. And then there was a lot of jealousy around my son, who was in England. He was jealous of his brother who experienced the war.

CO: This is Boris. Eventually you got him out and he went to the United States. So they were jealous of each other because one had escaped the war and the one had lived the war?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: That's right. Yes. Yes. Because to each of them, the destiny of other looked very rosy. You know, looked much better than his own.

CO: And what was the glue? What do you think it was that brought you back together as a family?

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: I first of all, I think that a very important person was my daughter. She just was as cheerful as I remember that she was making stars and jumping around and being very happy to have everybody around. Probably she was the perfect immigrant. She was ready to embrace the new country in every respect. You know, she was a war denier as well. She didn't like when we would talk about the war. She would hate that. And I remember she wouldn't let a single friend in her school to know that she comes from the wartime Bosnia.

CO: She was a refugee.

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: That's right. And she would keep this away from her school friends, from her teacher. She wanted to be like any other Canadian kid. So her desire to become part of everything in Canada that was a driving force actually for the entire family. When you have such a kid, you have to behave as a parent [laughs] as a grown...you have to as a grown up.

CO: Gordana thank you.

GORDANA KNEZEVIC: Thank you.

DF: From 2012, that was Carol speaking with Gordana Knezevic, a journalist who worked throughout the siege of Sarajevo. Last night, Ms. Knezevic was awarded for her courageous reporting at the Canadian Journalists for Free Expression gala. Carol herself was the chair of the CJFE gala committee.

[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 28, 2019 Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This