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 AIH Transcript for June 29, 2020

Hosts: Duncan McCue and Chris Howden

Prologue

DUNCAN MCCUE: Hi. I'm Duncan McCue, sitting in for Carol Off.

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

[Music: Theme]

CH: Tonight:

DM: Reckless abandonment. The author of a new Human Rights Watch report accuses Canada of abandoning Canadians in Syria. The former ISIS fighters and their families are being held in terrible conditions in camps.

CH: Seeing green. Coronavirus shutdowns have been hard on economies and also on efforts to curb climate change. Now some developing countries are working to ensure commercial recoveries account for both kinds of green.

DM: Public enemy no longer. A former American PR executive for the health insurance industry spent years pushing the narrative that Canada's public system was terrible. Now, he says, Canada's COVID response proves just how wrong he was.

CH: On the map, but slightly off. Pukka Orchestra became a Canadian radio staple despite a run of bad luck, thanks largely to the centric voice of the band's late frontman, Graeme Williamson.

DM: Too close for comfort. Pubs are set to reopen in England, but the rules aren't helping The Nutshell because it's one of the smallest pubs in the UK.

CH: And shell shock. When food is scarce, some bottlenose dolphins get creative, chasing prey into a sea shell trap. But researchers are really flipping out about how they learn the trick. As It Happens. The Monday Edition. Radio that makes a conscious effort.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: This former U.S. health insurance exec says he lied to Americans about Canadian health care

HRW Canadians Camp

Guest: Letta Tayler

CH: Letta Tayler is accusing the Trudeau government of abandoning Canadian citizens and violating international law. Ms. Tayler is a senior researcher with Human Rights Watch. The Canadians she's talking about are alleged former members of ISIS and their families. They've been held by the Kurds in northeast Syria since the defeat of the so-called Islamic State. In a new report, Ms. Tayler counts 47 Canadians living in the camps and prisons there. The majority of them are children. She went to those camps and says she found conditions that put the lives of those Canadians in danger. And now she's calling on the Canadian government to repatriate its citizens. We reached Letta Tayler in New York.

DM: Ms. Tayler, you believe these Canadians are being held in, quote, "life threatening and inhumane conditions." You've been to the camps. What was it that you saw that led you to that conclusion?

LETTA TAYLER: Well, I saw unimaginable filth, overcrowding, destitution and despair really inside these camps for thousands of foreign family members of ISIS suspects, including several dozen Canadians. I saw a raw sewage flowing into tents where children, emaciated children with swollen bellies and flies on their faces lay whimpering on the floor. I saw children drinking and pouring water over their heads from tanks that contained worms. Everywhere I went, I heard the sound of children coughing and crying. I saw mounds of garbage, children going through them, mounds of garbage with insects swarming around them. I saw tents that were tattered, blowing in the wind. And everywhere I went, I sensed a desperation and fear on the part of the detainees. They didn't know when they were going to get out, whether they were ever going to get home, whether the war raging outside in other areas of Northeast Syria was going to spill inside their tents and harm their children. At one point, some of the mothers inside Al-Hawl camp, one of the largest camps, told me that they were starting to write the names of their children with permanent markers, the names and birthdates of their children on their children's backs because they feared that they might be separated from them if the fighting spilled into the camps.

DM: One of the children you describe in your report is a young orphan named Amira. Can you tell us how her uncle came to find her and what happened when he did?

LT: Well, Amira was found by a stranger wandering alone on the side of a road in early 2019. At the time, she was only four years old. She told a passerby that her entire family that had been in Syria with her, her parents and all three siblings had been killed in an airstrike. She ended up under the care of a stranger in a tent in the same Al-Hawl camp. Her uncle in Canada saw a photo of her on social media. This uncle immediately recognized Amira from photos that he'd seen of the child, and he immediately contacted the Canadian government, asking if he could please adopt her or even if he couldn't adopt or somehow get her safely back to Canada. That was over a year ago. And despite repeated appeals to the government for help. So far, Amira remains in Al-Hawl camp, inside that war zone, thousands of miles away from a family that wants to a doctor and give her a new safe life in Canada.

DM: The people that are being held in these camps, I mean, they are being held there without charges, but they haven't been brought before a Syrian court either. They haven't had a chance to be heard. How does that square with international law?

LT: It is against international law to indefinitely, say, detain someone without being brought before a judge to review the necessity and legality of their detention, even in wartime. And because that's not happening and there are no plans for that to happen right now in war torn northeast Syria, these Canadians are just languishing in a legal limbo in really what amounts to a desert hellhole. And there is no way right now for the innocent among them, including all of these young children to be released. And meanwhile, any guilty among them are not being investigated or prosecuted for any crimes they may have committed if they were indeed members of ISIS who committed grave crimes.

DM: Well, the Canadian government says these are former ISIS fighters and their family members. And there's only so much they can do in a region that, as you say, is war torn and it's still too dangerous to send consular officials. How do you respond to that?

LT: Well, that argument just does not hold water to me with all due respect to the Canadian government. Canada just repatriated 29 Canadians from other parts of war torn Syria, areas that are just as difficult to access. And somehow they managed to do that without any consular officials inside Syria. Second, the detaining authorities in northeast Syria that are holding these Canadians, they have said to Canada, please take your nationals back, we do not have the capacity to care for the Canadians and other foreigners. These same authorities have said to Canada and other countries, if you think it's too dangerous to come in and get your nationals, we'll work with you, send in a delegate, just make sure we know they're an official delegate and you can send them in on their behalf. And Canada hasn't done this.

DM: It's a bit of a no win situation, though, isn't it? I mean if Prime Minister Trudeau brings these people home they're going to be Canadians who are worried about security threat and the uncertainties of prosecution here in Canada, or there's going to be challenges in terms of trying to reintegrate them back into Canadian society. So what are you hoping that the Canadian government will do?

LT: Well, Canada has the power to end the unlawful detention of all its Canadians in northeast Syria and the collective punishment of family members who may have had nothing to do with ISIS, including all those children. And it's not lifting a finger to do anything. So the fact that Canada finds it politically inconvenient to act does not absolve it from its responsibilities toward these citizens. In cases where they face risk to life and to health and they face the risk of torture -- I'd like to add that Canada has ample tools to prosecute at home, and we're talking about eight men, 13 women and one older child who were actually of age of criminal liability. So it's a very small and manageable number. Surely Canada, a robust democracy, a champion of human rights, is up to this task.

DM: Thank you for your time.

LT: Thank you so much. It's been a pleasure to be on your show.

CH: Letta Tayler is a senior researcher in the crisis and Conflict Division of Human Rights Watch. We reached her in New York.

[Music]

US Canada Healthcare

Guest: Wendell Potter

CH: If you had a choice during this COVID-19 pandemic, would you rather be living in Canada or in the United States? For Wendell Potter, there's no question -- you'd be better off in Canada. There's a reason for his thinking. Mr. Potter used to do public relations work for the American health insurance industry. And he says he spread lies about Canada's public system for years. Lies that he says have become extremely apparent during this crisis. Wendell Potter now lobbies for universal Medicare in the United States. We reached him in Philadelphia.

DM: Mr. Potter, what were the lies you told Americans about Canada's public health care system?

WENDELL POTTER: I told Americans that the Canadian system was not the system that we should have anything to do with. That it was socialized medicine. We used that term repeatedly to try to get people to be afraid of the Canadian system. We exaggerated and misinformed people about waits. I'm very familiar with the waits that you have to in many cases have in Canada for elective procedures. But we wanted people to have the impression that if you have an emergency or if you have any need for medical care, that you were put on a long waiting list. So that was one of the main things.

DM: I want to read one of your tweets. You said this, "We spent big dollars to push the idea that Canada's single payer system was awful and the U.S. system much better. It was a lie. And the nation's COVID responses prove it." What's your evidence for that?

WP: Well, your testing has been more consistent than ours -- more robust than ours. You've had fewer cases and fewer deaths on a per population basis than we have. I think you had about 21 to 23 deaths per 100,000 in Canada. We had far more than that -- I think about 37 or something like that. So the experience in this country has been among the worst in the developed world when it comes to both testing, treatment, and deaths unfortunately.

DM: A lot of people have responded to your tweet and some people are thanking you for speaking out. There are others who are taking you to task about your role in creating the current American system and hurting the Canadian system. How do you feel now about what you told people about the Canadian health care system?

WP: Well, I feel terrible about my role in that. I think a lot of the people were just hearing me for the first time. This is not the first time that I've began to make amends. About twelve years ago I left my job in 2008, I testified before Congress numerous times in 2009 and 2010 when Congress was debating the bill that became the Affordable Care Act. I've written books. I've written many articles. But this tweet for some reason or this Twitter thread really took off in ways that I just could not have anticipated. So there were a lot of people who were just finding out about me, thinking that I had just now begun speaking out. But I've been working to make amends. I've even done a speaking tour of Canada in recent years just to help people understand the difference between the two systems. And I've often called it an 'apology tour of Canada' when I've been up there. I do apologize. But I will say this, had I not been in that role, I would not know what I do know and not be able to pull the curtains back on how the health care system in this country really operates. People were surprised to hear and read what I had written in many cases. So I feel that it's very important for me to just continue to do that, to pull these curtains back and to provide information that people will just never ever hear.

DM: You left the health insurance industry in 2008, as you just mentioned. What happened to make you realize that you were, as you say, telling lies for the American health care system?

WP: There were a series of things that just occurred in the months preceding my departure that opened my eyes to what I was doing for a living and just what my company and the insurance industry were doing. I'd been able to lead a pretty isolated life with my executive position outside of Philadelphia. And I grew up in Tennessee though -- a very poor part of the country. I flew back to visit family during the summer of 2007, actually, and went to something that I read about in a hometown newspaper called the Health Care Expedition held at the county fairgrounds near where I grew up. I went there out of curiosity -- people who were there by the thousands lined up to get care that in many cases was being provided in barns and animal stalls on a county fair ground. I was just stunned. I couldn't believe that I was seeing this in the United States. And I knew that I had to accept some responsibility for that because I did work to protect profits, to perpetuate the U.S. healthcare system. And I realized that had I not been fortunate along the way, I could have been one of those people.

DM: If I could ask you this -- I mean, you're really extolling the Canadian response to the pandemic but our response in this country hasn't been perfect, our infection rates have been higher than in some countries, the number of deaths in long term care homes has been devastating and much higher than in other places, including the United States. So what do you think Canadians who've lost loved ones living in long term care homes should take from your message?

WP: Well, I didn't ever suggest that the Canadian system is perfect or that the response to the pandemic there has been perfect, it has been better than it has been in some places and certainly better than ours. But because the opponents that reform this country so often look to Canada and tried to mischaracterize it, that was the reason I mentioned Canada in particular. You could look at charts. You can see that other systems that have a single payer system or universal health care, at least in the developed world, have done a far better job than we have. It's a sad thing when anyone loses anyone in their family. The Canadians have a great deal to do and to learn from this as well as we do. But the experience, the ability, that you've had because of the structure of the healthcare system enabled you to be a bit better prepared than we were in this country.

DM: There will be many Canadians who will take some comfort, be receptive to your message. How likely is it that Americans are going to listen to what you have to say?

WP: You know, I think they are beginning to. This pandemic has has really opened the eyes of a lot more people to just our health care system puts so many people at a disadvantage. As you probably know, more Americans in this country they have private insurance -- they get it from their employer than from any other source. More than 40 million people have lost their jobs in this country, and many many of those have also lost their health insurance for themselves and their families. So people are beginning to wake up that our system is fundamentally structured in a way that causes so much harm to so many people and is very insecure.

DM: We'll leave it there. Thank you very much.

WP: Thank you.

CH: Wendell Potter is the president of the non-profit Medicare for All Now. He's a former U.S. health insurance executive. He was in Philadelphia. And you can find more on this story on our webpage: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Dolphins Hunting

Guest: Sonja Wild

CH: It's called shelling, and it's a rarely observed way that some Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins off Western Australia catch their prey. The dolphins use a seashell as a tool to capture their dinners. Behavioural ecologist Sonja Wild first saw dolphins doing this in 2013. Now she and her colleagues have published a study about the surprising way that they believe these creatures are learning the behaviour. The research is published in the journal Current Biology. And we reached Sonja Wild in Konstanz, Germany.

DM: Ms. Wild, this is fascinating. Can you describe how they do it? I mean, how are dolphins using shells to catch prey?

SONJA WILD: It is indeed quite fascinating. So dolphins use these empty shells of giant gastropods, so large sea snails, to catch fish. So they chase their prey, usually fish into these empty shells and then insert their beak into the shell, bring it up to the water surface and then shake it above the surface to drain the water out of the shell until the fish falls into their open mouth.

DM: And how surprised were you when you saw a dolphin pop up and shake a shell around it so that it could get its meal?

SW: Oh, I would definitely mind blown. Seeing it for the first time was just a "wow moment" because you do not expect popping a shell popping up right next to the boat that is being carried by a dolphin. You kind of like drop everything and then you remember that you're supposed to be taking photos.

DM: Why are they doing it?

SW: I guess it's just an alternative way of finding food. I mean, dolphins are quite playful animals. So maybe it's also just a little bit of fun to get your meal in a different way than usual.

DM: It's not a common occurrence. How rare is it to see?

SW: It is indeed very rare to see. So we've studied this behaviour in this population for 12 years. And in those 12 years, we've only seen the behaviour 42 times. So you can imagine that it's rather on the rare side.

DM: When you were studying them over that time, what were you able to pick up about where these bottlenose dolphins are learning that behaviour?

SW: So basically, we were able to get really really fine scale data on the dolphins demography, on their behavior, who they associate with, their genetics, and also the kind of environment and the habitat they use. So we managed to integrate a really long term dataset into quite a complex analysis and then figured out that these dolphins actually copy this behaviour from their mates. So from the peers that they spend time with.

DM: They're copying their peers. Is that significant?

SW: That is indeed quite special because dolphins normally rely on very much on their mothers for foraging behaviour. And we are now showing for the first time that they are indeed capable of learning foraging behaviour outside of the mother-calf bond.

DM: That's unusual, isn't it, that animals are learning from inside and outside family units?

SW: It depends on what species you look at. For example, great apes are very very much known for learning behaviour both from their mothers as well as from associated individuals. But for dolphins and toothed whales in general, it is very much the rule that calfs tend to copy their mothers for any foraging related behaviour. I guess it has a very important implication for understanding how dolphins may respond to changes in the environment, because learning from your mother is very useful in kind of stable environments that don't change because the parental behaviour is tested and stable and adapted to the environment. But as soon as the environment changes, the behaviour may become outdated or inefficient or even maladaptive. And in that case, it's beneficial if you start looking around to see what other dolphins are doing. And it has been suggested that species with the capacity to learn from others may be better able to survive changing environments because learning from others allows for a rapid spread of like novel behavioural innovations.

DM: And so what implications does that have around the world as oceans warm? Are we going to see more and more frequent shelling by dolphins?

SW: It's, of course, hard to predict what's going to happen, but the capacity for learning from others may really help them to overcome prey shortages as they will happen with warming climate. As for the shelling, we obviously don't know what's going to happen because it also requires that there's an abundance of these giant shells. And with global warming, we're not really sure whether they're going to persist in the area. It has already been shown that in 2011, the coastal waters of Western Australia, including Shark Bay, got hit by a very dramatic marine heatwave. And that has killed off a lot of the residents seagrass of invertebrates and fish, and most likely including those giant gastropods that the dolphins used for shelling. So in the two years after that heatwave, we had an increased peak in observations of this shelling behaviour.

DM: We do know that dolphins are simply some of the most intelligent animals in the world. How much does this research that you've been doing help us understand better their intelligence?

SW: Well, it certainly helps to understand their intelligence by knowing that they are capable of innovating such a remarkable behaviour. But it also helps us to understand that dolphin societies are not maybe not that different from us humans. They have very complex social relationships. They use tools. They are able to learn to use from one another. So it kind of helps understanding that humans are not the only ones with culture. Animals such as dolphins or great apes do you have culture as well.

DM: And they can get pretty creative when they get hungry.

SW: Oh, indeed. [Chuckles]

DM: [Chuckles] Thank you very much for your time.

SW: Wonderful. You're most welcome.

CH: Sonja Wild is a behavioural ecologist and the coauthor of a new study in the journal Current Biology. We reached her in Konstanz, Germany. And to see what it looks like when dolphins use seashells to catch their dinner visit our website: cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Graeme Williamson

CH: Musically, it sounded like something that would be on the radio in 1984: a synthesis of pop, new wave, and rock. But lyrically, Cherry Beach Express was an anomaly because it was a grimly hilarious indictment of police brutality. Still, radio stations wouldn't stop playing it despite the loud grumbling by Toronto Police. Pukka Orchestra always sounded great on the radio, but they were an anomaly, mostly due to frontman Graeme Williamson, whose slightly nasal, slightly Scottish accented singing voice brought up the wit in the lyrics and the poignancy as well. Graeme Williamson died last week in Glasgow in 1984. Pukka Orchestra's self-titled debut album was selling well and the singles were all radio staples. The band opened for Cyndi Lauper and Marianne Faithfull, and then everything collapsed. Their record company went into receivership and Graeme Williamson developed kidney problems, serious enough that he needed a transplant. Ultimately, his poor health forced the band to pack it in after one more album. He didn't sing anymore, at least not in front of crowds. But Graeme Williamson got a master's in creative writing and wrote fiction, so that sardonic, poignant voice lived on. It just moved to the page. And of course it lives on in the recordings and on Canadian radio.

[Music]

Part 2: How one of the U.K.'s tiniest pubs plans to cope with new physical distancing rules

Climate Change NDC

Guest: Jahan Chowdhury

CH: Coronavirus shutdowns have had clear consequences for economies around the world. Clearly negative consequences that is. What travel bans and stay home orders have meant for the environment, though, is less clear. We've seen evidence of reduced air and water pollution with planes grounded and most cars off the road. But international action on climate change has also stalled. Now a coalition of developing countries is meeting to consider how to ensure that their efforts to get back in the black also consider the green. Jahan Chowdhury is the country engagement director for the Nationally Determined Contributions Partnership, which was launched at COP22 in Marrakesh. And today he helped coordinate a virtual forum on greening the recovery. We reached him in Washington, DC.

DM: Jahan has COVID-19 been good news or bad news for climate change action?

JAHAN CHOWDHURY: I would say it's both good news and bad news. 2020 is a very important year for climate in general. This is the year when most of the countries are revising their climate plans. And what we are really seeing is that this has been a very difficult situation when it comes to the fiscal part. And we are now seeing that this has actually had a major impact on the climate budget for the countries.

DM: The good news, I suppose, has to do with some of the reduction in climate emissions that we've seen during the pandemic.

JC: I wouldn't call it a good news because, you know, you don't want to see a reduction in GHG emissions at the cost of 500,000 lives. So that's not necessarily what we want to see. But what's really happening is that there is a realization among the climate people, plus also people from finance and planning ministries that climate is important. If we can make sure that climate is integrated into the health recovery process, then not only we can address the climate issue, but we can also address both health and the growth issue. So there is an increasing realization that we need to make sure that these are all integrated so the countries are basically considering to take climate into the main recovery plan. And now we are also seeing that there's a much better coordinated action across different developing partners. They are basically saying, well, we are happy to provide you with the support to the developing countries, but they need to take climate into consideration.

DM: So what you're talking about there is in terms of economies, which have just been devastated by the pandemic, as countries trying to get their economies going again you're suggesting that that that should be combined with strategies to address climate change and the need for countries to develop green recovery packages. I mean, what does a green recovery package look like?

JC: So, for example, we are seeing requests from a country like Jamaica whose revenue has been devastated by lack of tourism. They are reliant on tourism. And what they are saying is that while they want to build up new health centres, they want to make sure that going into the future, the health centre is climate resilient. It is actually climate proof. And the energy that is going to be distributed to the health sector is coming from renewable energy. So that's the next approach that we are talking about. It's not just a health issue, but it's also a climate issue and overall social development issues. So that's kind of a direction and interest that we are hearing from the countries, this is not necessarily what we are suggesting. Of course, that's what our objective would be. But the good news is most of the countries where we are working, they are coming up with this kind of request. And that's great to see.

DM: A lot of the member countries that you're working with are developing nations. How many have signed on to the idea?

JC: So of we are now going to be deploying economic advisors in 30 countries, 30 developing countries. So far that's the request that we have received. But we are expecting that the number to pick up. So that's the kind of services that we have started to provide. What we are trying to again do is that, okay, fine this is what they want. But the question then is from their side, how can we actually do that? Can you provide us with the technical support? And that's what we are aiming to do.

DM: And I understand that that's part of the point behind embedding economic advisors in some of those countries, to help encourage that kind of training. Who are those advisors?

JC: So we are going to be deploying these services across our members. So we have members like World Bank. We have Germany, UK, Netherlands. They are all members of the partnership. So, for example, World Bank is likely to deploy an advisory in Jamaica, whereas in Costa Rica it could be deployed by the German government. So that's something that we are from the secretary is trying to do, trying to attract as many expertize as possible to deploy them to these countries that have requested for support.

DM: I know there are a lot of countries that are keeping their eye on the outcome of the U.S. election when it comes to climate talks. But what about developed countries which account for a huge portion of emissions right now?

JC: Yeah, I think we are also seeing huge movements in the developed countries. If you look at South Korea, they are talking about a new green deal. So here is a country that had the highest level of investment in 2018 on coal when it comes to overseas investment. And now they are completely banning any new contracts on coal. So that's a really positive signal that we are seeing. If you look at the European Union in general, they're also looking at this green deal. In fact, the Eurobond that they are supposed to issue as a recovery mechanism from COVID, the key purpose of this bond is actually going to be focusing on green development. So how, for example, they can retrofit old buildings with renewable energy. So there are some very positive movements, not only in developing countries, but also in the developed world that, as you say, is also responsible for high emission.

DM: Those are encouraging. But, of course, this year's climate talks in Glasgow have been postponed because of the pandemic. How optimistic are you that what's been happening over the past three months could be turned into a win when it comes to action on climate change?

JC: I'm very optimistic. I think it does give the countries a little more time to come up with good quality climate plans. I think because of the COVID situation, because of the both health and economic situation, a lot of the attention has been diverted elsewhere. So it will give us some time, some breathing room to bring back the attention to climate. So that's one. The second is that it also guarantees much more engagement from the population as a whole, when the countries are developing their new climate plans. So that will hopefully bring much more ownership. So I believe that it did open up the opportunity for us to improve the quality of the next generation of climate plans.

DM: Thank you for your time.

JC: Thank you so much.

CH: Jahan Chowdhury is the country engagement director for the NDC Partnership. Today, member countries met, virtually of course, to discuss how to make their post-COVID recovery plans. Climate conscious.

[Music]

UK Pub Rules

Guest: Geoff Page

CH: It's been three long months since people in England could sit in a pub and enjoy a frosty pint or a room temperature one depending on the draft, of course. So it's fair to say everyone's pretty excited for this weekend when pubs are allowed to open, even if they have to take extra safety precautions. But Geoff Page is facing a unique challenge. He runs The Nutshell, a pub in Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, and that's where we reached him.

DM: Geoff how many people could drink at your pub before the pandemic?

GEOFF PAGE: If you look at a comfortable arrangement, you look about 12 people. If it was a very cozy arrangement, busiest night if you like, you can get 18, maybe 20 people in. If you imagine it, you've got seating around the edges of the pub and you've got people sitting down there and then you've got people standing at the bar and standing on the floor. It is packed. And obviously that sort of set up does mean if you're sitting down, you potentially got somebody's bottom in your face or something like that. It's quite cozy.

DM: It is very cozy in your pub. I mean, you are held the Guinness World Record for the smallest pub in the U.K. at one point. Is it going to be a challenge to fit in people if you're able to reopen?

GP: We're just not going to be able to reopen as the current legislation stands. I'm not quite sure what's happening with you guys there. But from Saturday, the social distancing for us is being reduced indoors to one metre. Now, that comes with advice. And ideally, if it's one metre, then you have a mask on as well. And I don't know about you, but if I want to go out for a pint, then wearing a mask doesn't really help in terms of enjoying that pint. And frankly, if we used one metre as a measure, then I think if they stood still, we could get four people in the pub. People would have to maneuver. If the beer was put on the bar, the bar man would have to stand back to maintain the one metre. Anybody who wants to go to the bathroom, which is upstairs, two people would have sort of step out the way or step outside the pub. It is just not feasible. And obviously, that's when people first get there. You know what it's like perhaps once somebody has had a couple of beers, they're not paying attention quite as much as they ordinarily would do. And then, you know, you've got people definitely breaching this one metre. So we just can't do it indoors. It has to be outdoors if we can.

DM: The tininess of your pub is kind of what makes your pub so unique. And now it seems like it's working against you. So how frustrating is that?

GP: It's exactly as you've just described. You can't have it always all the time. We've been really fortunate as well in that we've had local government assistance. You know, we had a sizable grant dropped into our account shortly after we had to close. Our government is covering 80 per cent of the staff's income while we're closed. The brewery that we work alongside, they've been brilliant, they've taken back all the unopened stock that we had. We are just thinking it's just the way it is as opposed to anything else. And we're just doing what we can to open as soon as we can. because the staff is really keen to get back, they have had enough time sitting at home twiddling their thumbs, decorating and all that sort of thing.

DM: [Chuckles] If you can only fit four people in there, I imagine it's got to be difficult to be able to make a buck out of that. So what are you going to need to do to be able to reopen?

GP: There is an application process whereby you get what's referred to as a patent license, which means you could have tables and chairs potentially, or just people able to stand outside. And we've sent in our proposals. We're waiting to get confirmation from the local authority that they're happy for us to have people drinking outside, that's the game changer for us. And we can work out our best for the staff to look after people and make sure that we get it right with people drinking outside.

DM: Your country has had more than 312,000 confirmed coronavirus cases, more than 43,000 deaths. Do you think it's too early to open?

GP: I think it's a very geographically driven decision. I mean, obviously, a lot of the deaths that we've had in the UK are in major cities. I think with outside drinking, certainly I wouldn't have a problem opening. I've checked with the staff. The staff are all happy to operate. And all the usual precautions in terms of masks and regular washing of hands, etc will be taken. We'll obviously set it up so that there is distance between people who are not the same family group, as it were. So I think if you're outside, I personally am comfortable with it. If you're inside again, it depends on the venue. Certainly with The Nutshell inside is a no go. But other larger pubs I don't think it's any different particularly than to go into the supermarket.

DM: The pubs in England have been closed for more than three months since COVID-19 began and the pandemic started. I wonder how excited are people to get back to the pub again on Saturday?

GP: I think everyone seems to be playing cool, who I've spoken to, at the moment. But also, I think, you know, there's enough anecdotal evidence to suggest that there is a degree of excitement building. I think it depends who you are as well. You know, I'm a man in my 50s now, my 50th year. So, you know, the pub is something I've always enjoyed. But I bet if I was in my early 20s and haven't catched up with friends, I think I'd be very keen on the pubs opening. I think if I was a single man in my early 20s, I'd be even more keen for the pubs to be open and to get out, meet people and all that sort of thing. So I think it's going to be, you know, dependent on your age, your family and all that sort of situation. Those that went to the pub enjoyed it before lockdown, I think are going to be the one's sort of chomping at the bit to go again.

DM: And you must have some very loyal customers there at The Nutshell. Do you think they're going to be disappointed that they won't be cheek to jowl and sitting so closely together this time around?

GP: I think they'll get over it. So the most loyal customers are the ones that also came when it's so busy. They like it when they can talk to one another and sort of chat and see each other from one end of the bar to the other. I'm sure they'll still be there outside, hopefully, if we get that permission. I'm sure there'll still be there. So they'll be all right.

DM: Thank you for your time.

GP: Thanks.

CH: Geoff Page is the owner of The Nutshell, a pub in Bury St Edmunds in Suffolk, UK. That's where we reached him. And you can find more on our webpage: cbc.ca/aih.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

June 29, 2020 Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This