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 2020

The Current Transcript for January 27, 2020

Host: Matt Galloway

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: Keep in mind that when we're talking about novel coronavirus, here in Toronto, the risk in our community continues to remain low.

MATT GALLOWAY: Public health officials might be working to reassure an anxious population, but that hasn't stopped some from directing fear of the coronavirus towards specific communities. This morning, the lessons of stigma learned or perhaps not, from the SARS crisis. And then.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: And it's not like she didn't give it up. She could have put her head down, but she stood up tall and smiled and made sure that, you know, they were able to get the shot.

MG: Harry and Meghan left the UK in part to flee the paparazzi, but the cameras were waiting for them here. In 30 minutes, what is a reasonable expectation of privacy in Canada for the recently royal couple? And what about for the rest of us mere mortals? Also, Anna Maria Tremonti, you've heard of her, I'm sure. She's back with a preview of a brand new podcast. But we begin with Chinese-Canadian communities fearing a backlash as a virus spreads. Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway. This is The Current.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Chinese Canadians speak out against racism, misinformation in wake of coronavirus

Guests: Terri Chu, Frank Ye, Kerry Bowman

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: Well, misinformation is definitely something that's a feature of outbreaks. This is something that we at Public Health are prepared to respond to. The challenges that sometimes these urban legends, misinformation can totally take up a life of its own.

MG: Dr. Stephen Hoffman is among the many public health experts now grappling with how to respond to the new coronavirus. Thus far, two cases have been reported in Canada, but it seems at this point fear is spreading faster than the disease. Over the past few days, thousands of parents from communities north of Toronto have signed a petition calling on students who have recently returned from China to be quarantined. That kind of response has some people worried that these feelings are less about infection than they are about xenophobia. And it prompted the York District School Board to write to parents, cautioning them against bias and racism. Frank Ye is a student at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto. He's been tracking response to the coronavirus online. And Terri Chu is a mother and activist. Good morning to you both.

TERRI CHU: Good morning.

FRANK YE: Good morning.

MG: Frank, we'll start with what you have seen this week. Describe the post that you saw on Facebook.

FRANK YE: So it was in an unofficial Western University Facebook group. An individual claiming to be an alumni of Western had made a post sharing a fake news essentially labelling Chinese peopl, as dirty, as disease ridden and use a very derogatory term, starting with the letter R to describe the Chinese community. And when I saw it, it kind of brought back a lot of flashbacks of SARS. And seeing this prejudice and this idea that Chinese people you know this, that we're dirty or disease was coming back and that really kind of made me feel like this pain and anger that I haven't felt in a while.

MG: Not just on Facebook, looking at Twitter, these are some of the less objectionable, if I can put it that way, tweets that we came across. "Every virus erupts in China." "Stay away from Chinatown in New York." "Coronavirus is on the Chinese." When you hear that, when you see that kind of stuff again, how does it make you feel?

FRANK YE: It's hard to kind of put into words because in some ways it's a mix of a lot of emotions, really. It's this frustration of not being able to do enough to kind of combat that. It's this sense of anger of having this label painted on you, of having your community painted as this monolith. It's this sadness of having to once again see your community and see those in your community be victims of this racism. And it's just, you know, I guess also fear that not only as a community do we have to do the precautions to protect ourselves and protect others from the virus, but also have to also grapple with this racism now.

MG: Terri, this is something that you were tweeting about over the weekend, fearful that there might be a racist backlash to the arrival of this virus. What's going through your mind when you hear about the posts like the ones that Frank saw?

TERRI CHU: You know, it's a lot of it out there is unnecessary. I mean, I'm seeing a lot of posts about, oh, Chinese people eating bats or snakes or whatever. I mean, the reality is that every culture that does eat animals has their own unsavoury practices. I mean, it's not like western animal eating practices did not bring us mad cow or antibiotic resistance, right. As we have to keep a lot of this in mind, a lot of this is born from poverty when people have to eat whatever that they could find and catch. And yes, some of it may have made its way into delicacies and whatnot, but it's really unfair to judge people based on their consumption habits like that. And so you're seeing a lot of this kind of backlash of, oh, they're dirty because they eat whatever animals and then you're painting these people who have been here for generations of, oh, you're part of a group and you do that. And it just becomes very unsavoury.

MG: You tweeted "In my Chinese moms chat group, we discussed how to brace ourselves and the kids for the inevitable wave of racism coming our way as this unfolds. Many of us have never been to China. But no, we will not go unscathed." What are you worried about?

TERRI CHU: You know, we're worried about mostly the kids, what they will hear. I mean, those of us who were around during SARS remember, for example, a friend of mine, she was teaching piano and she was waiting for a ride. And some high school kids drove by and started screaming SARS, SARS, at her, right. And so that's the kind of stuff that is very unnecessary and that's the taunting that we fear as parents that we don't want our kids to have to go through.

MG: Have you experienced anything noticed people treating you differently in the real world since the coronavirus outbreak started?

TERRI CHU: We're very early right now and I am in an academic environment as well. So it's academia is a bit of a bubble. So that's not reflective of the real world.

MG: Anecdotally, there are stories of people of Chinese heritage, for example, you know, they get a tickle in their throat, they're afraid to cough on the subway because they're worried how people are going to look at them. You're nodding Frank. Has that happened to you, or is that something that you're aware?

FRANK YE: Actually, just just yesterday before I was coming on the show, I was talking to my mother, who works as a nurse in a Toronto hospital. And this story, like I kind of get emotional telling it, but you know, she does work as a nurse. She's in a Toronto hospital. And yesterday a patient actually came up to her and asked her, is like can I have a mask? And my mom as a nurse has to ask, oh why, are you coughing or sneezing? And the patient told her, no, there's just so many Chinese people around here. I need a mask. And my mother is like me, she's ethnically Chinese. And to me, just understanding SARS, the majority of people who cases in Canada, 43 percent of cases in Canada were health care workers, right, were people putting themselves on the front lines. Nurses like my mom who take care of sick people, who put themselves at that risk, but nonetheless, they're still gonna be victims of this, right. And that was very, very painful to hear. But beyond that, after I made, you know, posts talking about the fact I was coming on, so many of my Asian friends messaged like, you know, today on the subway, I sat down and this lady looked at me and walked away. As I was getting on the train this couple whispered how the Asian man with the mask had a disease or how someone just visibly covered their mouth when they came into proximity with an Asian person. So these stories are happening, even though it's very, very early on, like these things you notice and even these little actions, they might not mean much, but nonetheless, it kind of dehumanizes you and makes you feel lesser than or that there's something wrong with you when you've noticed them.

MG: I mentioned in the introduction the petition that's been signed, north of the city of Toronto, something like 8500 parents signing this petition, in part calling for students who have family members who have recently travelled to China to be quarantined. People being asked to report to the teachers so that parents of other kids can determine whether they want to keep their kids in school or want to send them home. What would your response be to people who say that this isn't about xenophobia? This isn't about racism. It's about precaution. That a virus is spreading. People want to do everything that they can to make sure that they don't catch it.

FRANK YE: I think there's a very fine line between taking the precautions that we need to that experts say is necessary at the time to prevent the spread of the disease. So whether that's quarantining the people who need to be quarantined, watching travellers that come from high risk areas, no one has any issues with that. But I think what the concern is right now is that the spread of this virus, just like the spread of SARS, has been used to bring back a lot of anti-Chinese anti-Asian tropes and racist stereotypes that really date back throughout centuries in Canada's history. Right, this idea of yellow peril, of this Chinese horde coming to destroy Western civilization, to bring disease. And we see a lot of that reflected in how people are reacting here. And I caution that it's very important to not let our response and how we react to this be driven by paranoia. We need to listen to the facts. We need to be responsive to what the experts tell us and take the precautions that we need to take.

MG: Terri, what would you say to those who have signed and it's not just in York region, there are petitions elsewhere in the province of Ontario, perhaps, and beyond. What would you say to people who've signed those petitions?

TERRI CHU: I say we need to put things into perspective. And I mean, it doesn't help that the media is driving a bit of a frenzy around the coronavirus. There's a lot of misinformation out there, people don't know what's going on and they're afraid. So a lot of this is fear driven. But if we put into perspective, SARS killed 44 people in Toronto during that outbreak. 41 pedestrians got killed by vehicles last year in Toronto, right. So if we treated all these pandemics with the same degree of severity, I think we would all be better off. We look at something, we say we can other that because it's an unknown. It's a thing from over there, we can contain that, we can stop that. But the reality is there are far greater risks to our children on the day to day. 5900 people, Canadians, die from air pollution every year. So these are issues that are real that we can tackle that is in many ways much harder to tackle, but much greater risk to our children. And that's the kind of perspective I think people should have. It's like, yes, there's this thing that you can other and that you can say, hey, look, this is scary, but there are real risks that our children face on the daily that are far greater.

MG: You said at the beginning that we are just at the beginning of this. That the story around the coronavirus is really just starting to unfold now. Are you worried that what you are talking about, what Frank has been describing, will get worse as the story continues?

TERRI CHU: I think it very likely will if ihistory is any indicator to us and if there's one thing I can ask from our allies and our friends, it's just to be there for your friends, to stand up for us, to stand up for the community. And have better representation of people, not just as their roles as Asians, but in their professional lives, as whatever, you know, give them platforms so that people see us as not just Asians. People see us as professionals, as whatever and I think that helps in the grand scheme of things.

MG: And is your sense, just finally, that we as a society learned those lessons from SARS? There was to Frank's point, a real story around stigma of the Chinese community, the Chinese-Canadian community in 2003, when the SARS outbreak happened. Have we learned from that?

TERRI CHU: I think that would be a very ambitious statement. You see a lot of what's happening now politically. I'm hoping, I'm very confident that the medical community has learnt a lot of lessons and they're very prepared for this. To say that the general public is at large has learnt a lesson, I would say that's probably a bit of a stretch.

MG: Terri, thank you.

TERRI CHU: Thank you.

MG: Frank, thank you very much.

FRANK YE: No problem.

MG: Frank Ye is a student at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto. He's been tracking response to the coronavirus online. Terri Chu is a mother and activist. Handling public fears that have the potential to spill over into xenophobia is a challenge for public health agencies. Kerry Bowman is a bioethicist at the University of Toronto. He was on the frontlines as a health care worker during the SARS outbreak. Kerry, good morning to you.

KERRY BOWMAN: Good morning.

MG: What do you make of what you just heard from our previous two guests about what they're experiencing, whether it's online or in, as they call it, the real world?

KERRY BOWMAN: Yeah, it's definitely occurring and it's definitely happening. And there's absolutely parallels to SARS. You know, in the early days of SARS, there was and when I say early days to SARS, I found there was a tremendous transition during the SARS outbreak, kind of outbreaks, plural, because they were sort of two waves of it. But in the early days, people's reactions tended to be often quite guttural. There was clearly racism. Why would anyone go near Chinatown? Associates I worked with colleagues of Asian descent reported that people would move away from them. It was clearly going on. During SARS though there tended to be a certain amount of, I thought, growth. I mean, we had health care workers that were scared to even come to work, but people grew into it quite quickly. But here's the thing that we need to remember, SARS was essentially a hospital outbreak. So within the hospitals, there was a lot going on and it was a serious situation, but the broader community in Toronto was not that affected from a virus point of view.

MG: You were there on the front lines. What did you learn and take away from how you deal with fear when it comes to a disease?

KERRY BOWMAN: Well, there was people on the frontline that were at far higher risk than I was. I was actually quarantined for a while. But one of the things that I really, really learned was suddenly, you know, we in health care often talk about this person's a risk factor. That person's a risk factor. We as Toronto health care workers were a risk factor. And, you know, you had restaurants asking health care workers not to come. You know, I had people asking me not to go to social events, parties, things like that.

MG: Because you were working in the healthcare system?

KERRY BOWMAN: And you know, that's a very useful lesson or it was for me as a bioethicist and formerly I was a social worker. That was a very important lesson to see what it's like to be pushed out and ostracized in that way.

MG: What do you make of these petitions? The one in York region, 8500 signatures. It says, we cannot be overly cautious in protecting our children, requesting that students be allowed to wear masks. Those who have travelled to China be required to report that to a teachers, so the parents of other kids can determine whether they want to send their kids to school or not. At the University of Waterloo, apparently there's a petition with more than 20,000 signatures calling on officials there at either to close campuses or make attendance optional, with students saying we do not feel safe going to school and into public places. What do you make of those petitions?

KERRY BOWMAN: Yeah, it's a strong overreaction and there's clearly elements of racism to it. I mean, we really need to look at anyone that is feeling symptomatic. If it's your child, you keep them home. If it's you, you keep yourself isolated. There's clearly hints of racism or even some would say overt racism within it.

MG: Not this idea, we can't be overly cautious in protecting our children. You don't think that there's something to that? That parents worried any opportunity to stand up for their kids is an opportunity the parents need to take?

KERRY BOWMAN: It has to be grounded in something real and some kind of science. I mean, what we know from outbreaks and what I learned from SARS is, SARS you know, it's more of a sociological event in a lot of ways than a biological one. And the reaction is very powerful, including economic, which I'm really not qualified to speak on. But but that. It's a huge element of it. But, you know, these things can divide people, but outbreaks in the 21st century, you know, are global. And we need to look at this from a global point of view. It's not about China, it's about the whole world. And yes, people in China eat exotic foods. That's all over the world. It's not just China.

MG: The response from the York District School Board, in part is at times such as this, we must come together as Canadians and avoid any hint of xenophobia, which in this case can victimize our East Asian Chinese community. And we must rely on our shared values of equity and inclusivesivity. Are you encouraged by that response?

KERRY BOWMAN: Very much. I commend the board for taking that position. And, you know, the reality because of the nature of this is the numbers are going to rise in the days ahead. We all know that and these are still early days. You know, our risk is low, but again, the social reactions are going to be and economic are going to be considerable. The numbers are clearly going to rise all week and we need to be prepared for that.

MG: What have we learned, if anything? Terri was sceptical as to whether we've learned anything from how the public, to your point, responded and perhaps changed its response during SARS?

KERRY BOWMAN: Well, what we learned during SARS is that we do better when we all pull together. And believe me, late in the SARS epidemic, we had really, really pulled together as a city, not just as health care workers, you know, and there was a lot of thrust towards economic recovery. There was a lot of, you know, good, good will. That's one of the things we learned. I think, you know, again, we need to look at this globally, that this is the reality of 21st century public health is, you know, all these countries are, you know, having an interchange of effects and, you know, outbreaks always occurring in China. Actually, you know, that's not true. Look at Latin America. Look at Africa. They're all over the world where things are emerging.

MG: How does social media change? I mean, sounds like an obvious question in some ways, given, you know, some of the garbage that you'll see on social media. But how does social media change this or challenge how we would handle discrimination and xenophobia and fear in a situation in a context like this?

KERRY BOWMAN: Well, the validity can be a huge problem, because if mainstream media, you know, has some responsibility for validity, social media less so. But social media can also have a very positive effect when people challenge what is being said. I actually think this will get better. I think, you know, in these early days and I remember in SARS the early days were the roughest from an ethical point of view. You know, we had health care workers that were questioning the duty to care. You know, I've got children at home, why should I go to work? Why would I put them on the line? And, you know, we really grew into that. And I think we will again. I actually think we're ahead on this. I hope we're ahead on this, I should say, than we were last time in terms of social cohesion.

MG: What's the role of public health officials in helping to directly confront hints, the whiff of xenophobia or racism?

KERRY BOWMAN: No, I think they absolutely need to adjust the way the York Board did. And I think they will. There's a lot of very talented people doing a great job in public health.

MG: And what would that look like?

KERRY BOWMAN: Well, making comments when they, you know, making comments when they do public, you know, public broadcasts, that how we need to work together on this and not isolate. I really think that's part of it. Because, again, I go back to the fact that this is a social event, a sociological event, and not just a biological one. And so and in some ways, that's the bigger challenge before us in the weeks ahead.

MG: What advice would you give them? I mean, I think you think of SARS and for a lot of people in this city, it's the work of the late Sheila Basra. Who was.

KERRY BOWMAN: She did wonderful work.

MG: Who was front and centre in terms of calming people down, but also being that voice of authority in many ways and leading people through this crisis. If you were able to give public health officials a word of advice, what would you say to that?

KERRY BOWMAN: As if I'm qualified to give them. I would say, you know, I looked at the panel on late Saturday when you had six people and one microphone passing it back and forth. I found it very bureaucratic. I actually would agree that they need, you know, one or two representatives rather than an entire panel.

MG: And to those families again who have signed the petition and might be feeling afraid right now, what would you say to them?

KERRY BOWMAN: I would say we need to look at this from a health point of view and not from a point of view of where only people have come from. Also, the novel coronavirus is no longer just in China. I'm forgetting the list of countries because it's changing, but I think it's eight or nine. I'm not certain. So, you know, it's no longer just about China.

MG: Kerry, thank you.

KERRY BOWMAN: You're welcome.

MG: Kerry Bowman is a bioethicist at the University of Toronto. Your thoughts on this would be welcome. You can reach us through the website, cbc.ca/thecurrent or on Twitter @TheCurrentCBC. CBC News is next. And then, get ready for a familiar voice.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: She likes to play and she likes to challenge a little bit. It's almost like she's a bit of a cat. She swats near a little mouse and you like, you gotta, like move a little bit. I find it interesting and kind of challenging.

MG: Anna Maria Tremonti up for a challenge. She is here on the launch of a new podcast. Find out who that cat is swatting away. Coming up in half an hour. My name is Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current on CBC Radio One.

[Music]

Back To Top »

Meghan and Harry’s life in Canada will test the country’s privacy laws

Guests: Danny Hayward, Lainey Lui, Iain MacKinnon

MG: Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

MG: Still to come, Anna Maria Tremonti will be here with a preview of her new podcast. But first, the paparazzi versus privacy laws.

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: The airport was easy. We were all sitting at the airport and she pulled out to pick up her pilate friends. She pulled right up to the curb, sat in the car and I just happened to be right there. So I walked out to my car, opened the door, sat down, rolled down the window, pulled my camera out the window, didn't even have to get out the car.

MG: That's one of the many photographers who descended on British Columbia hoping to get that money shot of former royals, Harry and Meghan. the couple say they have been harassed ever since arriving in Canada, accusing news outlets of pointing long lenses at their windows. And that photo of Meghan splashed all over the papers last week, they say it was taken without her consent. This morning, we're looking at where privacy ends and freedom of the press begins. Danny Hayward is a former paparazzo who has also run picture agencies in the UK. Danny, good morning.

DANNY HAYWARD: Good morning, Matt or good afternoon from London.

MG: How familiar did that sound to you that story of getting the photo of Meghan at the airport?

DANNY HAYWARD: Yeah, I mean, very familiar. I mean, it's really interesting watching it from over here. I was telling one of your producers earlier that there's been three sets of pictures from Canada of Meghan since she's come back. And that never happens over here in London. So there's certainly something changing over there.

MG: I want to talk about that. What's changed? Tell me about this job. What is it like working as a paparazzo?

DANNY HAYWARD: I started back in 2001 and it was a different landscape back then. It was really, it was driven, you know, fundamentally it was driven by money. That's what's pretty much, I would say has led to the downfall in this business. And it's not as fun as it was.

MG: What was fun about it?

DANNY HAYWARD: Well, I used to take pictures of film sets, music videos, and as more and more money started to syndicated in the business and, you know, sloshing around, it led to more people. The barrier of entry dropped really low. And it was so many people just picking up on a camera and joining or getting involved in the business. And because there's no regulation, which is the fundamental problem with this business, anyone can pick a camera up and say they're a paparazzo or or a news journalist. And fundamentally they're not. They're just driven by the money and that has led to a lot of mistakes and the moral compass, I mean it's out of control.

MG: What kind of pressure are you under to get that shot?

DANNY HAYWARD: A lot of these people are on retainer deals, they're on retainer deals, and their job is dependent on it. They've got to get that result. And where these agencies and the agencies put that pressure on these people and because they're not trained, there's no guidelines, it's it's a Wild West out there. Here in England and in America.

MG: That photo of Meghan out for a walk in a public park, what would a photo like that be worth?

DANNY HAYWARD: A hundred thousand dollars.

MG: A hundred thousand dollars for that shot?

DANNY HAYWARD: Easily. Easily.

MG: And so when it's worth that much money, you talked about the moral compass, how does that compass sway given the amount of money that is at stake there?

DANNY HAYWARD: Well this is the fundamental problem. It's all the decisions are based purely on the amount of money that is being that is changing hands. There is no other there decision put in anyone's conscience. And because there's no regulation, there's no guidelines. It's free for all. So you're, until thos is put in place, this will always continue.

MG: What are the lines that the paparazzi should not cross?

DANNY HAYWARD: To be honest, my team, I taught my team personally. You know, there is an expectation of privacy and you shouldn't shoot people in the public eye dropping their kids off at school, at a hospital, a funeral. There are fundamental guidelines that I try to teach my team. Well, I did teach my team. And you continue to see freelance and staff paparazzo continuing to do this.

MG: I was going to say how often do those lines get crossed?

DANNY HAYWARD: Daily. Daily.

MG: Is part of this just about the fact that the photos are worth that much money, or is there some sort of relationship between the photographer and the people whose photo is being taken?

DANNY HAYWARD: Yes. Well, back about 10 years ago, I wanted to remain in this business and I was seeing where these lines were being crossed daily. So I kind of spun the telescope around and was like, I'm going to start working with agents and the talent direct. It was a safer environment to go down that route. And then I forged out a great career from it. So I would say at least 80 percent now, what I do is working with the talent and the agents hand in hand.

MG: And are those sort of staged photos? I mean ways that they can kind of be out there and they know they're going to have a photo taken?

DANNY HAYWARD: Yeah, there's different reasons why they do it. One, it gives them control. Two, it gives them another revenue stream. Three, if they're promoting something, it's good for that. If they've got perfume, if they've got a film or if they've got a book coming out. And the fourth example is if there is a scandal or a real piece of breaking news, it's best to work with myself and my team to control that image.

MG: How do you reconcile the work that you do? I mean, in some people's minds, paparazzo is a dirty word, but there are a lot of people who love those shots of celebrities as well. So how do you reconcile that?

DANNY HAYWARD: It's you know, I stand, I know what I do. I can only base what I do and the guys that work for me. And there are numerous times where we drag pictures to the trash can. We haven't seen people on a certain job because it would be morally wrong. So that's how I stand. We do stuff that we believe is either in the public eye, is a justified public interest and if it's like I said earlier, if it's a movie set or a music video, that's all fair game. If it was, for example, Justin Bieber and Hailey walking around Universal Studios, there's no real expectation of privacy there. If it was them at a funeral, I believe there's an expectation of privacy.

MG: How likely is it that Meghan and Harry will get more privacy here in Canada than they might have in the UK?

DANNY HAYWARD: That's a really interesting question because she got shot three times and the sets of pictures, I've never seen those type of pictures ever when she was in England. And they happened within seven days. Since Harry arrived, interestingly, not one picture has come out. So does it look like there's going to be a slowdown now? Yes.

MG: A hundred thousand dollars is a lot of money for a shot though.

DANNY HAYWARD: It's a lot of money.

MG: Danny, we'll leave it there.

DANNY HAYWARD: That's what's driving it.

MG: It's good to talk to you. Thank you.

DANNY HAYWARD: Thank you Matt.

MG: Danny Hayward, a photographer and a content expert, worked as a paparazzo early in his career in London. That relationship between celebrities and photographers who helped make them famous can be, as you know, a stormy one. But as Danny said, in some cases they need each other. Few people might know more about that than Lainey Lui. She's a co-host of The Social, reporter for E!Talk, writes the blog laineygossip.com. Lainey, good morning.

LAINEY LUI: Good morning. How are you Matt?

MG: I'm well, what do you make of what you just heard from Danny Hayward, former paparazzo?

LAINEY LUI: I thought it was really interesting, considering you know, that he has his lines, what he'll cross and what he won't cross. I'd be interested in hearing what his peers or other people would say about what their lines are.

MG: How much privacy do you think Harry and Meghan can expect in Canada?

LAINEY LUI: It depends on how we define privacy. I mean, if it's just about taking photos and being sighted, I don't know that they'll ever get the amount of privacy for example, you and I get because they're the most famous couple in the world right now. And so when you think about where they are, where they have been, as we know, like they've been quiet for about a week now. So if they're still in Vancouver Island, that's not a very big place. It's not a very big town. And they're the heat score in that town right now. Can you imagine the people who live there? They all know that Harry and Meghan are there. If they go to Whole Foods, if they go to the gas station, they're going to get spotted and listen, people are excited. When you live in a small town and the most famous couple shows up in your small town, I don't blame people for then immediately texting their sister in law or their brother in law or their husband or their uncle and being like, oh, my God, I just paid for groceries in line at the Whole Foods next to Harry and Meghan. They're going to have eyeballs on them. So that is kind of no privacy, right. They're not gonna be able to move around the world anonymously in that sense in doing day to day mundane activities without being made.

MG: I mean, it would be kind of interesting to see Harry at the gas station, but we are Canadians as well. And the idea is, the myth is that we'rekinder, we're more polite, we're more gentle, and we're going to let people be. Is that really the case when it comes to celebrities or are we more respectful of people's privacy?

LAINEY LUI: I don't know that and that's the thing, I don't know that people losing their chill over the most famous couple in the world means they're not kind. I mean, when we first found out that Harry and Meghan was a bit, that they were in Vancouver Island, I think that they interviewed like a restaurant owner and she was talking about how they were staying in the vicinity and they saw their security guards. And that was genuine excitement. And to a certain extent, the fact that people are excited about them, is what they need to go forward and be able to do the work that they want to do, right. Like they have a platform. For their platform to exist, it means that people have to care about them. People have to be interested in them and what they have to say. And so it's hard to separate that, people caring about them and wanting to know what they're going to say with people, noticing them and being excited when they step into their restaurant or when they're in their small town or pumping gas next to them. It's a really, fame is a really weird thing. Lines are so blurry and this is a great example of it.

MG: What did you make of those photos of Meghan out for a walk with their son, Archie and the dogs? Was that a violation of her privacy?

LAINEY LUI: Well, I guess from I mean, you'll have to speak to a legal expert in terms of how it's defined here in Canada, but they weren't high quality photos. If you look at the video that accompanied the photos, you can see that there are branches in the way. So the photos that ended up getting released, a lot of them are manipulated in the sense of their crop. So they cut out certain things to frame the subject properly and that's common in paparazzi photos. But you could tell that they weren't high resolution and when you look at the video and you can see the branches of an evidently and quite obviously the photographer was tucked away in the bushes. And I feel like, you know, when you're tucking yourself away in the bushes and you're taking photos, there is a aa factor there for sure.

MG: Did you use the photos?

LAINEY LUI: No, I did not.

MG: And it was that an ethical decision of a line that you did not want to cross, because to your point, the photographer was tucked away in the trees somewhere taking those shots.

LAINEY LUI: Well, for me, I have subscriptions to photo agencies. So first I had to find out which photo agency it belonged to and then I, you know, I looked at the if you want to call them negative. So the photo agencies kind of send out what's called a contact sheet. I looked at the contact sheet, it came with a video. So when I first looked at the contact sheet, I said, OK, these looked pretty legit. But then I looked at the video and that's when it was, you know, to me a little bit squeaky. But then I also heard about the notice. So then the couple sent out a legal notice telling publications, hey, these were taken without the consent of the couple and we will pursue legal action. We do not want these pictures published, we object to them being taken. So I wasn't going to mess with a legal notice and besides, I mean, they at that point were already acquired by the Daily Mail.

MG: To some people the idea that they would ask for more privacy seems a bit rich, that this is, to your point, a very famous couple, they need that fame. I mean, they haven't gone and retired from being royals to go and work, you know, in gardening or baking bread or something like that. They're going to start a foundation. They're going to be famous. They're going to be out there in the world and they need that fame. Isn't it a bit much to ask for privacy if you're still riding that wave of fame?

LAINEY LUI: I agree with you to a point, definitely. They have a platform. They are royals. They want to go out there and again, use their platform for good. And they kind of depend on that relationship with the public to be fascinated by them, to kind of be able to elevate them to the status of being able to have this platform. That said, I think that for them, this this insistence on privacy specifically relates to how the tabloids in the United Kingdom have been covering them and the kind of tone that's been adopted about their lives. It's been so negative. It's been racist. I think that I would support them. I would support them in their contention that the coverage has been unfair and unbalanced and the violation on their privacy has been malicious from the perspective of how the tabloids over there have been reporting on them.

MG: What do you think their life or their lives would be like in a year's time? Will the attention die down? Will he be able to go to the gas station and fill up the family trucks with gas and not be gawked at by the rest of us?

LAINEY LUI: I don't think that that's a realistic ambition to be able for Prince Harry to go to the gas station and not be gawked at. I think what is it going to be like a year from now? That's the big question, right? Everybody's wondering where they're going to live, where they're going to put down roots or what they're going to be doing. I think they have lots and lots of options. But if your question is, will they be just like us? The answer is 100 percent no.

MG: And so will their fight for privacy then still be an active fight in a year, do you think?

LAINEY LUI: I think that they will be spending the next year, if I had to guess, figuring out what privacy means for them and how if they have the resources to acquire resources and systems in place, they can move around undisturbed the way that other celebrities do. You know, as you know, my job is to cover celebrities and one of the one of the celebrities who is best at kind of going underground when he needs to is someone, for example, like Tom Cruise. So we know Tom Cruise shoots movies all the time. He's on location and he is seen when he's on movie sets. But when he's not working, the man disappears and he has some of these resources to make it happen. Security teams, travel teams, travel different ways of travelling, understanding how to come in and out of a building, which buildings are best suited for that kind of movement. So the big, big stars in Hollywood, they have a game plan. They already know they have it locked down. Meghan and Harry have some contacts in Hollywood. So it's about sharing best practices and whether or not they will adopt that and whether or not they can afford to. That requires a considerable expense. So we'll have to think about, we'll have to see about how they're going to fund that lifestyle.

MG: Lainey, thank you.

LAINEY LUI: Thank you.

MG: Lainey Lui is the co-host of E!Talk and The Social on the CTV network. As she mentioned, there are lines around privacy in this country and the arrival of Harry and Meghan could put those privacy laws in this country to the test. Iain MacKinnon is president of the Canadian Media Lawyers Association. Good morning to you.

IAIN MACKINNON: Good morning.

MG: Let's start with the basics. Legally, how much privacy can celebrities, no matter who they happen to be, expect in Canada?

IAIN MACKINNON: Well, that's really the million dollar question, and unfortunately there isn't a clear answer because the answer to those type of questions are often very contextual and very fact dependent and based on the particular circumstances. And the reason for that is because the two key factors in any claim for violation of privacy rights are largely what's the reasonable expectation of privacy somebody has. So there's this objective, reasonable person standard that a judge or jury would have to put themselves in. And two, is it, is the activity that's being complained about the invasion of privacy, is it again considered to be highly offensive to a reasonable person?

MG: And so is it different depending on where you happen to be in a public space versus a private space?

IAIN MACKINNON: Very much so. Very much so, because obviously, if you're going about your life inside your home and there's a photographer 100, 200 metres away with a telephoto lens, A, you have a much higher expectation of privacy in your own home and B, a lot of people would consider that to be highly offensive in terms of the intrusion on your privacy.

MG: What about walking in a park? As Meghan happened to be and photographers are there in the trees or the bushes or whatever snapping photos?

IAIN MACKINNON: Yeah, I mean it again, it's so subjective where you draw the line as a reasonable person, where somebody else might draw the line as a reasonable person can be different. So there is no objective line, but generally speaking, I think they would have a very uphill battle if they actually pursued this in the court.

MG: So if they tried to sue the case would be a difficult one?

IAIN MACKINNON: It would be very difficult because, as you mentioned, it was in a public park. There is a low expectation of privacy.

MG: Well, there is a privacy law in British Columbia though. I just wonder how different it would be there versus if they lived somewhere else, like perhaps in Toronto.

IAIN MACKINNON: The Privacy Act in B.C., along with a few other provinces, does provide a statutory claim for for violating somebody's privacy. But really, it just mirrors the common law claim that exists everywhere in Canada. And the two main ones are ones called intrusion upon seclusion and the other one is called public disclosure of private facts. Those are the two main ones. But there isn't any legal case ever in Canada involving a celebrity on the basis of those, either those claims or a Privacy Act claim.

MG: Have a listen to this American freelance photographer, was in Victoria to get a picture of Meghan. We're not using his name because he says he's been threatened since an interview went to air.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: We've been rather fortunate so far to get photos, but we're not stalking her. We don't chase her. We were sitting here at the park when she showed up. You're not allowed to chase them, so if you just sit somewhere and they show up, well then what are you going to do?

MG: All legal in terms of what he's saying?

IAIN MACKINNON: Yes. Yeah, it's in my mind anyway. Like I said, it's subjective opinion and different reasonable people will differ, but absolutely legal in my estimation.

MG: Is there a line? We are talking about this with the former paparazzo, is there a line part of that's moral, but the legal line that you'd have to cross to be breaking the law and that sort of situation.

IAIN MACKINNON: There is a line. And the difficulty is defining that. And I think what Harry and Meghan are really trying to do here is set down a new, drawing a new line in the sand and setting new ground rules for what they're prepared to accept and not accept because they've benefited over in the UK largely from this unwritten gentlemen's agreement between the British press and British paparazzi and the royal family, which gives them a certain amount of access in exchange for respecting their privacy when they're not doing public duties or royal duties. So your question, is there a legal line? Yes, there is, but the tricky part is defining exactly where that is. And it really does depend on the facts and circumstances of each individual case.

MG: The bottom line though, as Lainey Lui said, this is the most famous couple in somewheres on the planet right now. How much privacy can they really expect no matter where they happen to be?

IAIN MACKINNON: Well, exactly. And that's my personal view, too, is they can't have their cake and eat it too. They can't be public figures in the sense of royals. Their security detail to date has been paid for by public funds. Their future income, presumably is going to be dependent on having a public profile.

MG: They're not just disappearing into the weeds.

IAIN MACKINNON: I think they would like to think they could, but they can't have it both ways. So they're again, it comes back to what's their reasonable expectation of privacy in their particular circumstances? In their circumstances, they don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy when they're out in public walking in parks and stores and that sort of thing.

MG: Is thatdDifferent from the rest of us?

IAIN MACKINNON: Sure it is. Sure it is. Because this is all contextual. So somebody who is not a public figure, who doesn't attract public attention, this is a big story in Canada and the U.S. This has never been done. Somebody leaving the royal family. What does that look like? How do they recede into public or private life and away from public life? You know someone like me, I may have a higher expectation of privacy because I'm not a public figure.

MG: If there was a word of advice that you would give Harry and Meghan, if they want to live a private life in Canada, what would that word be?

IAIN MACKINNON: There's better ways than sending threatening letters to the media. And what I would suggest is talk to them, work out an agreement. You know, Mr. Hayward talked about how valuable these photos were. It's supply and demand. The reason why it's so valuable is because there aren't any out there, as he mentioned. He's never seen photos like that before. And that's because in the UK, they had a gentlemen's agreement where they would talk to the press and said, respect our privacy, we'll give you some access in our public duties and then, you know, leave us alone.

MG: That if you gave up some of the photos, you might you know be able to saturate that market and they wouldn't be worth as much money.

IAIN MACKINNON: That's right. I think it's more of a negotiation with the press because I don't think they're going to go away anytime soon. Now, if they truly recede into the private life, then I think people will lose interest, but right now, they're a big story.

MG: Iain MacKinnon, thank you.

IAIN MACKINNON: You're welcome.

MG: Iain MacKinnon is president of the Canadian Media Lawyers Association. Coming up in about 90 seconds, Juan Guaido declared himself interim president of Venezuela. A year later, Nicolas Maduro remains firmly in charge. We will look at Canada's role and what might actually break this stalemate. That's coming up after your regional update. My name is Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current.

[Music]

Back To Top »

More with Anna Maria Tremonti

Guests: Anna Maria Tremonti

MG: Good morning, I'm Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: I was out shoveling and I got a bit hungry, so I came in. And you know the Puritan beans and wieners excellent. So I open them up and no wieners.

MG: All that work and no wieners in the tin.

VOICE: No wieners in the tin and man wasn't I, I was disappointed. But anyway, this is what I'm saying, you got to have the supplies and you have to have the stuff. You've got to come visit us.

MG: I will. I love the Fogo Islands. It's a beautiful place. And you got your shovelling ahead of you. You'll need your energy. I'll let you get back to digging yourself out. Gus, it's good to talk to you.

VOICE: Listen, how is Anna Maria Tremonti doing?

MG: She's great. She's great. And she's probably happy that she's not buried in snow, although we have a little bit here in Toronto.

MG: The one and only Gus Penton of Fogo Islands speaking about the recent Newfoundland snowmageddon. Gus has many, many fans among our listeners. People have been petitioning, saying he should have, at the very least, a weekly segment on The Current, if not his own program. He mentioned someone else who is also well-loved by our listeners, Anna Maria Tremonti. She has been preparing a new CBC podcast. It's called More. The first episode was released today. Anna Maria. Good morning.

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: Hi.

MG: Well, this is shouldn't you be sitting in this chair? This is unusual.

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: Yeah. Yeah, it is unusual. I kind of like it over here, though. And Fogo Island. You know, I've always wanted to go there. Now I can visit him.

MG: Gus will have you. I'm sure he wants to know and many other people do as well, how are you doing?

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: I'm great. Thank you. Thank you. I'm trying something new. So I've got a learning curve, but I'm good.

MG: How did this work? You finished The Currents, you do your last episode and then immediately start working on this new podcast?

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: I've been noodling the idea of moving over to do podcasts, which are, as you know, more limited edition, so I could try new things for a while. So the question was, how would I do that? And could I possibly leave The Current? I'm always thinking about like, what do I do next? And so it was time.

MG: The first morning that you didn't have to wake up and come in here. How was that?

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: It was fine. I remember the first morning that you were on here officially as the new host and was a crazy week, of course, with the downing of the airline, the jet outside of Tehran. And I just thought, yeah, he's sounding great. You know, more than one person can cover something. So I felt, it feels good.

MG: You quit deftly there, deflective from talking about yourself to talking about me. What about you? Did you, I don't know, you do something for 17 years. Did you wake up and you think I feel like I'm misisng something?

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: Yeah. Like, you wake up and you think, well, I think that I'm missing something, but it's my choice, rght. So that's OK. And I'm still like a total junkie. Like, I want to know what's going on in the world. I miss the team and all of that stuff, but because I've gone to something I've chosen to do. I'm good with it.

MG: What do you love about podcasts?

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: Oh, I love the ability to take even more time. I can go down a rabbit hole because I'm not tied to the news current affairs cycle in the same way.

MG: Who did you talk to for this?

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: First one is Catherine O'Hara. It's really interesting because everyone I say that to like they everyone loves Catherine O'Hara. And so it's a different kind of conversation and it's a different kind of focus. So we wanted to talk about being someone who always works with collaboration. So different in the sense that you look at someone's life or career and you say, oh, I want to know about that thread that goes through their life. Let's talk about how they think, how they process their own life through that prism. So things like that.

MG: That's interesting. I mean, someone like Catherine O'Hara, some of the other names that are on the podcast are people who have done a lot of interviews before. What are we going to hear? What are you going to get out of them that's different in many ways? Part of it is you asking the great questions that you ask, but on their end, what are you asking them to give up that perhaps they haven't given up?

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: Well, and that really depends on how it goes, right. But what I do is follow something that maybe somebody hasn't followed because they want to stick more closely to what's going on in their life at this moment. So with Catherine O'Hara, I started looking at the background on her and I realized this is a woman who has, you know, a Canadian actor comedian who has spent so much of her time in the U.S., lives in the U.S. No one's ever asked her about politics. No one's ever asked her about that stuff. So I did, you know, and she's careful, but it's interesting. But it's just one little thing and then you go down a rabbit hole in a way maybe that you can't when you're talking about a specific show that they've got or specific books that they have, that kind of thing.

MG: Margaret Atwood is one of your guests. We're going to hear a little bit of this interview with Margaret Atwood. She's a tricky person to talk to in some ways.

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: Mmhmm.

MG: What do you like about talking to Margaret Atwood.

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: A lot of people are afraid to interview Margaret Atwood. And the first time I talk to her, I was nervous, but I'm less nervous. But you've got to be on your game because she likes to play and she likes to challenge a little bit. It's almost like she's a bit of a cat and she swats and you're a little mouse and you can like, like you got to like move a little bit. And it's kind of, I find it interesting and kind of challenging.

MG: And if you're lucky, she'll grab your hand and what? What are we going to hear here? She takes your palm.

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: She reads my palm. Who knew?

MG: Margaret Atwood can read a poem. Have a listen.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: You are intensely stubborn. Both of your hands. Despite this smiley.

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: And I'm not even clenching my fists when you say that.

VOICE: This smiley exterior that you present. I would not actually want to go out with you in a contest of wills. This may mean that you sometimes go head to head with people when you might more profitably slither around them. But you are, you know, people will find that out if they, if they really want to have it out with you. You're kind of bossy.

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: You should see them in the control room.

VOICE: They're laughing?

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: They're laughing.

MG: Kind of bossy?

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: Kind of. You heard that nervous laugh of mine. You know, it's interesting. Margaret Atwood says she's a Victorianest and because of of her work over many, many years and her writing, she wanted to know more about that time and palm reading at that time and how they saw things. And that's why she reads palms. She also, by the way, when it all ended, she looked at my whatever finger it is, ring finger on my left hand. And she said that my creativity is strong, but not fully realized, which I thought was pretty good, because if it's completely realized, that's not a good thing. Right? You want to stay creative.

MG: Good opportunity perhaps. And you get to go into a different direction. Did she have you right? Did she read you? Truly into you? Are you a bossy person?

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: Yeah, I am a bossy person. Yeah. And I'm a stubborn person. Yeah.

MG: Who else aside from Margaret Atwood and Catherine O'Hara will we hear on the podcast?

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: You're going to hear Malcolm Gladwell. We're going to talk about the importance of changing your mind, about listening to other people and changing your mind. We're going to hear from Elle Mills, who is a YouTube star, Canadian, grew up in Ottawa. She's very public with her private life and I wanted to know more about living that life. She really has struggled with issues around suicide and with issues around mental health. And she's done that on, she's done it on YouTube more than she's talked to her family about it off. And so we talked about that a little bit. It's kind of interesting. And I kind of wanted to know what she was thinking.

MG: You go into these conversations and you're obviously supremely well prepared. Tell me something surprising that you've learned from one of your guests.

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: How really in the end they take it where they want to take it. It's not a news interview, so I can't just cut them off and go back to what do you really think about what's going on today? So they take it different places. I talked to Frank Gehry and he kind of wanted to talk about buildings in a different way than I wanted to. So we finally kind of like, it's just kind of fun to listen to how people answer and where they go. So what has surprised me is the willingness to have these conversations and to really let them go somewhere new. And what else has surprised me is that almost everyone comes back to the importance of talking to each other. We don't start there. I wasn't planning to go there with everybody, but it really matters to people right now.

MG: What do you mean?

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: The importance of conversations, the importance of if we can only talk together more and bring each other together more. So even Frank Gehry believes buildings need to talk to each other and then the people inside need to exist together. Like he sees it as an obligation of his to do some good in the world through buildings to bring people together. And I didn't know that. I thought that was great.

MG: It's great to see you.

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: Great to see you.

MG: Former host of The Current, Anna Maria Tremonti. She has a brand new podcast. It's called More. The first episode is out now. If you're new to podcasting and you want to hear Anna Maria Tremonti, we have a video on how to download a podcast. You can find it at cbc.ca/thecurrent.

[Music]

Back To Top »

As Venezuelan politician Juan Guaido visits Ottawa to shore up support, what role should Canada play in breaking the political stalemate in Venezuela?

Guests: Yvon Grenier, Maryhen Jimenez

MG: This is The Current on CBC Radio One. I'm Matt Galloway.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sounds from demonstrations in Ottawa]

MG: From a video posted on Twitter, those are supporters of Juan Guaido as he landed in Ottawa yesterday for a meeting with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Guaido is on an international tour trying to drum up support for his movement to push Nicolas Maduro out of the president's office in Venezuela. It was just over a year ago that Juan Guaido declared himself interim president following national elections widely considered to be fraudulent. Canada was among the countries that lined up to recognize Guaido as the legitimate head of government, but in the year since, it's become clear that Maduro is still in charge. Yesterday, Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister, François-Philippe Champagne, reiterated his support for change.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: You have to look at the economic hardship that people are living. You have to look at the environmental disaster that is going on now with the illegal mining of gold. You have to look at the humanitarian crisis that is going on. We think that there will be about six million displaced by the end of the year. So everything that we're seeing suggests that we should redouble our efforts. The solution needs to come from the region. We will work with the region, but I think the president would tell you that with Canada's support, we're going to look ahead to restore democracy in Venezuela.

MG: Yvon Grenier is a professor of political science at St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish, Nova Scotia. Professor good morning.

YVON GRENIER: Good morning.

MG: Juan Guaido has been on this world tour in Britain, Spain, Davos at the World Economic Forum. You surprised that he rolled into Canada this week?

YVON GRENIER: No, because Canada is a very important country and is a sort of international coalition of supporter. Canada was very instrumental in creating that LIMA group in 2017 that has a number of countries of the region, including Canada, of course. And they are pushing for a transition, a peaceful transition to democracy in Venezuela. And so I think we, Canada's a very important ally of Mr. Guaido right now.

MG: Remind us why Canada chose to back him. What was the argument for supporting an opposition leader and saying that he was the legitimate president of Venezuela?

YVON GRENIER: Well, I think what happens is that, first of all, democracy, human rights is part of our mission in foreign policy. But, of course, our record is pretty spotty. And in this particular case, I think that there was a sense that we could have a win there. This is a good place to showcase our push for democracy and human rights. Venezuela is a country that has a democratic tradition, certainly by Latin American standards. And this is a country also where you had democratic sort of force pushing for a change and a force that had, in fact, institutional support because that legislative assembly was, it was still is formed by individuals who were elected in free and fair elections. And that body the elected Mr. Guaido as the interim president, he didn't appoint himself. And so in a context where the situation is getting from worse to worse with humanitarian crisis, refugees and so on and so forth, it becomes really a regional, even international crisis. There was an opportunity there, I think for Canada to say not only we support these principles in general, but we actually have the option of doing something concrete in order to push for some kind of process that would be a made in Venezuela process, where within Venezuela itself, you would have some actors who would push for using the Constitution to organize free and fair elections. And that way instead of going down and, you know, in more and more crises that maybe the country could start looking up and restore democracy and start fixing some of the economic problems in the country as well. You have like a shortage of food, of medicine. You have people really starving there. You mentioned, Mr. Champagne mentioned six million displaced people. You have at least five million refugees all in the region. And so it is seen as a sort of a crisis and at the same time, as an opportunity for Canada to actually do something that may very well work. Now, it didn't work as quickly as I think they anticipated, but they really thought that they could.

MG: Well I was going to say, I mean what did Juan Guaido accomplish in the year since he swore himself in?

YVON GRENIER: Well, I think he accomplished a lot and at the same time, not enough. A lot in the sense that he's still touring and he's received as the interim president, which is kind of interesting when you think of it. It's not something that happens too often that you have, in fact, two de facto presidents in the country. And right now they have even three legislatures. So it's sort of extraordinary that he maintain some public support, although his public support, according to polls, I don't know what to make of some of these polls, but apparently he lost some of his popularity and but he's still a fairly popular politician. Where the problem is, is with a strategy like this. I think it's supposed to work pretty quickly. It's not like the old form of like constructive engagement where, you know, you having relations with a country that is dictatorial. And once in a while you talk about democracy and human rights, but you have no expectation of changing anything anytime soon. You know, like when you think about our relations with a number of Middle Eastern countries where there might not be a democratic force pushing for a change, where there might not be a crisis. So there's a sense that things will not change anytime soon. But in this case, I think that it's sort of a stalemate right now. And there are a lot of moving parts in the army, the support within the army, the different sectors in thearmy, pouring players as well, like Russia. Russia is playing a very important role. So it's not impossible that Mr. Guaido could still be successful in the next months or this year, but certainly it's been a stalemate for at least 10 months now.

MG: This involvement of Canada in this and you mentioned LIMA Group and Chrystia Freeland, the former foreign affairs minister, was very vocal in wanting Canada to take a lead role in this. This isn't supported uniformly across the country. Certainly not by everybody who is elected to Ottawa. Have a listen to Heather McPherson. She's the NDP deputy foreign affairs critic.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: What concerns me most is the idea that by meeting with Guaido that the prime minister is actually taking a side and is sort of putting his nose where it doesn't belong. This is something that the Venezuelan people have to do. They have to make a decision on how they're going to move forward. This move really doesn't help matters. The NDP have always said Venezuelan families have the right to choose their president, not foreign countries.

MG: What do you make of the argument that Canada and the prime minister certainly, should not have taken a side, that his nose has been put into a place that it doesn't belong?

YVON GRENIER: I think there is no contradiction between, on one hand, supporting Mr. Guaido as the interim president and at the same time supporting a peaceful transition to democracy in Venezuela is the ultimate discussion.

MG: But the argument though, is that Canada's involved in something that we have no business being involved in. To her point, that this should be left to the Venezuelan people to decide.

YVON GRENIER: Yeah, but again, like I would sort of disagree with this because one it's not excluding the other option. You have like 50 plus countries and the LIMA Group, the Vatican was involved. All kind of countries are involved in different ways. And clearly Canada is not seen as neutral, but at the same time, if you have as an option to have, let's say, an open, free and fair elections in which perhaps Mr. Maduro can be one of the candidates. So like to say we support Guaido, doesn't mean we think that Guaido should be the president for now and ever. It's just I think the way I understand it, the Canadian position is that there should be free and fair elections for president and for the legislature in Venezuela. And Mr. Guaido is just part of that.

MG: Yvon Grenier, we'll leave it there. It's good to speak with you this morning. Thank you.

YVON GRENIER: My pleasure. Have a good week.

MG: Yvon Grenier is a political science professor at St. Francis Xavier University who specialized in Latin American politics. Nicolas Maduro has held his ground in Venezuela despite an economy that is in freefall. On the streets of the capital, Angelica Varela doesn't have a lot of hope. She works as a house cleaner, lives in a Caracas slum with her husband and one year old.

SOUNDCLIP

[In translation]

VOICE: When I go out, I see things I want to buy for my son. I can't buy shoes or clothes. I would like to take my son to a playground to know other things, but if I take him, then I have nothing to buy food with. If I start buying shoes for my boy, I won't get food. If I could, I would leave this country because it's just terrible being here and even worse when you have no one.

MG: Maryhen Jimenez is a lecturer in political science at the University of Oxford who has studied the Venezuelan opposition movement. Good morning to you.

MARYHEN JIMENEZ: Good morning Matt.

MG: We heard a description there of what life is like in Caracas. The professor earlier saying that the situation has gone from worse to worse. How would you describe the economic situation for the average person in Venezuela right now?

MARYHEN JIMENEZ: Right. So for the average person it's really dramatic, right. So the audio basically represents life of ordinary Venezuelans. It is true that in the capital city in Caracas, some people from the remaining middle class or the higher class, economic upper class has access to dollarized goods. So they are living somewhat of an okay life, if you want to say that, but in the rest of the country, so outside of Caracas, the life of ordinary citizens involve gas cuts, power cuts, lack of money to buy goods. You know, children are not going to schools. The hospitals have collapsed. So you must think of the Venezuelan population of a population that is struggling to get by day by day. So it's truly dramatic. And that's why, as you've discussed earlier, the refugee crisis has increased. And that's why it's also been very hard to mobilize and to enact regime change, because the humanitarian emergency is really dramatic.

MG: Well, help me understand that, because if things are as bad as they are, how much is support is there still in Venezuela for Nicolas Maduro?

MARYHEN JIMENEZ: So according to the last polls across polling enterprises, Maduro still has around 15 to 20 percent of support. So that, of course, takes into account this is an authoritarian regime. We don't know yet what people would have said if this was a democratic system. So if away from repression and away from the networks that work to repress and to control the population, particularly the poor, we don't know how the people would actually cast their opinions. The rest of the of the population, so the remaining 80 percent doesn't look as positive either, if you like, because the partisanship is very low. So opposition parties poll around 4 to 8 percent and 50 percent of Venezuelans don't identify with a party. On that side, Juan Guaido still has around 40 to 50 percent of support. Last year, he had 60 percent of support of the population. Of course, you know, the longer it lasts, obviously, the leadership gets caught into difficulties with maintaining his support.

MG: I guess I'm just still trying to understand if things are as bad as we're hearing they are, how do you explain the lack of momentum for Juan Guaido? He arrived in the last year swearing himself in. There seemed to be momentum and a lot of that momentum seems to have fizzled. Why is that the case if things are as bad as they are?

MARYHEN JIMENEZ: Right. I mean, the figures speak for themselves. Right. So let's look at the politics of the situation. When you have a population that is everyday looking to buy food or medicine to get by, obviously, it's very hard to care. It's not that Venezuelans don't care about the politics of the country, but you're now really engaged in your material survival, right. So the middle classes and the upper classes that are still mobilizing and especially the diaspora are trying to, you know, get the message across. Now, why haven't we seen averaging change so far? I guess there are several explanations. One, this is a modern autocratic regime, right. So Maduro still has the control of the territory, even though he shares some of, part of the territory. He controls the military. And this is this is a fact and this obviously doesn't allow for political change so far. So this is a really demobilized, if you like, a demobilized and controlled society. And it's very risky to go outside. Then, of course, you have the side of the of the opposition. Guaido has momentum and he's now regaining momentum and that's really important, based on this international tour. But now really, what's important is to organize the population at home and to bring a message of a realistic political change through elections. So I guess that the internal divisions within the opposition over the last years didn't help either to really push for a realistic negotiated exit.

MG: I want to play another clip from that young mother we heard from at the top of the segment. Here is what Angelica said about the political situation.

SOUNDCLIP

[In translation]

VOICE: I wouldn't vote for anyone. If Maduro is the president, he shouldn't be looking out for himself. He would see the people suffering, children on the streets eating from the garbage, people struggling inside of hospitals. I wouldn't vote for anyone. I'd rather stay like this.

MG: How typical is that attitude when it comes to how Venezuelans see not just politics, but the politicians who could represent them?

MARYHEN JIMENEZ: I think that her sentiment is representative of a large part of the off the population. You know for the middle classes or the upper classes, the symbolism of the opposition or the momentum of Guaido is very important. But for those who are struggling to get by, obviously this means not nothing, if it doesn't bring real change for them. So that's why I think it's important that Guaido or part of his discourse internationally has been to increase the support, the financial support of the international community for the humanitarian assistance. So far Venezuela is not receiving as much as other humanitarian crises worldwide. So I think that to, you know, get ordinary Venezuelans on board. They would have to see that the opposition is not a real alternative and that even without the political change that will you know, it will take some time until there's a transition in Venezuela, even until then, if they can get something, say humanitarian assistance, that will galvanize the support of ordinary citizens for the cause of democracy again.

MG: Just a couple of quick questions before I let you go. One is, given the fact that Nicolas Maduro continues to hang around, is there a point at which Juan Guaido gives up on this effort to take over, given you know what's happened over the last year?

MARYHEN JIMENEZ: Well, I don't think he will give up, especially not now after he you know, he has gotten the support. I think that the most important thing right now is to really change the strategy of last year. So if Venezeula wants to pursue political change now, it's the time to do the realistic work. And I think it's very positive, for example, that yesterday in Canada, he said that Cuba needed to be part of the solution. This is something that he would have never said, for example, last year because of the internal struggles within the opposition, right. The hardliners don't want to negotiate. The hardliners don't want to consider any other options. So I think that the realistic discourse that he's trying to put on the table now will be helpful.

MG: Just briefly then, what would a successful Venezuela look like to you?

MARYHEN JIMENEZ: I think now success would mean that people would feel an alleviation to their humanitarian crisis. I think that the discourse of Guaido needed to be a more based on reconciliation, negotiation, so that the day after basically the democratization process can be eased up from the executive. I think that coming together again as a nation will be very important to reconstruct the country.

MG: Maryhen Jimenez, we'll leave it there. It's good to speak with you. Thank you.

MARYHEN JIMENEZ: Thank you, Matt.

MG: Maryhen Jimenez is is a lecturer at the University of Oxford who has studied the Venezuelan opposition movement.

[Music]

MG: That is our program for today. Stay tuned to CBC Radio One for Q. Tom Power will be speaking with, among others, Stretch and Bobbito. They are deejays and had have a legendary radio program in New York City, breaking some of the biggest names in hip hop before anybody else knew them. They now have their own album and you'll hear Stretch and Bobbito coming up on CBC Radio One. You can listen to Q, you can listen to The Current and just about anything else of CBC Radio's audio, CBC Podcasts and CBC Music through the new CBC Listen app. Get it wherever you find your apps. And while you're there, subscribe to our new podcast, The Current Weekly, in the meantime. That's it for The Current. I'm Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening. We'll talk to you tomorrow.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

Jan. 28, 2020 episode transcript

More Stories Like This